Allowed

Rahul Singh @ Rahul Somvanshi v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Confidential Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Feb 2024/170/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge High Court bench disposed of an anticipatory bail application. The court found the accused's role was largely facilitative with a clean antecedent record. It granted bail pending the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. subject to appearance, no tampering, and passport surrender conditions.

What did the court decide?

Grant of anticipatory bail till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of like amount.

Rahul Singh @ Rahul Somvanshi Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:9545

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 170 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rahul Singh @ Rahul Somvanshi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Confidential Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nadeem Murtaza,Sudhanshu S. Tripathi,Suryansh Singh Suryavanshi,Yash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Learned AGA informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including upto date case diary.

¶7

Heard Shri Nadeem Murtaza, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant - Rahul Singh @ Rahul Somvanshi in Case Crime No. 400 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 409 IPC, Police Station Gosainganj, District Lucknow, with the prayer to grant him anticipatory bail as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that it is a case of false implication, even if all the allegations levelled in the First Information Report are taken on its face, it will emerge that the only fault of the applicant is that he has introduced the informant as his father and beyond that he has not alleged to have done any thing .

¶10

It is also submitted that impugned sale deed is also shown to have been executed in favour of informant by Sanjay Kripalani and no money with regard to the consideration has not been paid to the applicant.

¶11

It is also submitted that the applicant is serving at present at ACC Cement and before ACC Cement he was employed in Asian Paints and therefore, though his name is appearing as

¶12

one of the Director of the Company but he was not actively involved in the management of the Company as is also evident from the FIR as well as the statements of the prosecution witnesses and therefore his complicity in the alleged crime is only made on account of him being the son of Mr. Anil Kumar Singh who is father and is managing the company.

¶13

It is further submitted that the applicant is not having any criminal antecedent. He is ready to cooperate in the investigation and would remain present before the Investigating Officer as and when his presence would be required.

¶14

Learned AGA, however, opposes the prayer of anticipatory bail.

¶15

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is reflected that the pith and substance of the FIR as well as the statement of the prosecution witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., a copy of which has been brought on record, it will emerge that the role of the instant applicant is confined to facilitating the transaction and it is alleged that because instrumental of the informant and his father Anil Kumar, however, the sale deed is admittedly has been done by Sanjay Kriplani, though he applicant is shown as one of the Director of the Company it is stated that considerable force that he since long is doing service and at present is employed at ACC Cement and before that he was employed in Asian Paints. It is undertaken that the applicant shall remain present before the Investigating Officer as and when his presence would be required and will cooperate in the investigation. He is not having any criminal antecedent.

¶16

Thus, having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme court in Gurbakhs Singh Sibbia vs. State of Punjab; (1980)2 SCC 655, Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2020) 5 SCC 1 and Nathu Singh Vs State of U.P. and Others, 2021(6) SCC 64, MANU/SC/0360/2021; the protection from arrest may be granted to the applicant till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

¶17

Thus, the instant anticipatory bail application moved on behalf of the applicant- Rahul Singh @ Rahul Somvanshi is

¶18

finally disposed of with a direction that till the submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., in the event of arrest of applicant- Rahul Singh @ Rahul Somvanshi in the above noted case, he shall be released forthwith on anticipatory on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of Station House Officer of police station/court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶19

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required, if investigation is in progress;

¶20

(ii) 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 such person from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶21

(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned/Court concerned.

¶22

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer / Government Advocate is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶23

The Investigating Officer will continue with the investigation, if it is in progress and the same will not be affected by this order.

¶24

Order Date :- 1.2.2024 Muk

¶25

Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rahul Singh @ Rahul Somvanshi v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Confidential Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Singh @ Rahul Somvanshi v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Confidential Lko. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jitendra Kumar @ Jatin vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Ram Adhar Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Shubham Bhargav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Shoeb Iqbal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Santosh Gupta @ Santosh Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Vipin Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.