Allowed

Ankur Jain v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Aug 2023ABAIL/959/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. filed by Ankur Jain in a case involving alleged forgery. The Court allowed the application for anticipatory bail, granting liberty subject to conditions, distinguishing it from previous proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed on personal bond with two sureties, conditioned to appear in court and not tamper with evidence or leave India without permission.

Ankur Jain Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:162371

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 959 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Ankur Jain Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mehdi Abbas

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Abhishek, learned counsel for the applicant and Mehdi Abbas, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Pankaj Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

¶7

This is the second anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the applicant in Complaint Case No. 1299 of 2015, under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 of IPC, Police Station Lalkurti, District Meerut, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail. His first anticipatory bail application was dismissed for want of prosecution by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.7313 of 2022.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have forged the signatures of the informant by opening a joint account as such, had undertaken several transactions by opening Demat account.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and has apprehension of his arrest. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has further stated that the final report (charge-sheet) has been submitted although he had challenged the report by filing a petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. but the interim protection granted therein was vacated in the light of judgment of the Apex Court passed in the case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. and Another vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2018 (16) SCC 299.

¶10

Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶11

On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶12

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of " Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 ",

¶13

the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶14

Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶15

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Ankur Jain involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-

¶16

i. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶17

ii. that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶18

iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶19

iv. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶20

vi. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶22

It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶23

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶24

Order Date :- 10.8.2023 Siddhant

¶25

Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN PAHAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ankur Jain v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankur Jain v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Faiyyaz Vs State of U.P.

Mohd Jafar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Jyoti Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ratan Manglani Vs State of U.P.

Yogendra Singh @ Bade Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tej Singh Parihar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others