Ambika Prasad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:50466

Court No. - 8

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3394 of 2024

Applicant :- Ambika Prasad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Pandey,Shiv Kumar Soni Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Saurabh Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶6

Counter-afÏdavit has been filed by the State which is taken on record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he does not wish to filed any rejoinder, it is in the aforesaid backdrop that the instant bail application has been heard.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Vishwas Saraswat, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Saurabh Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the complainant.

¶9

The applicant Ambika Prasad has sought bail in Case Crime No.599 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC relating to police station Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda.

¶10

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is 76 years of age and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that as per the averments contained in the FIR, it is stated that the property which is the subject matter of the dispute belonged to Maharaja Dharmendra Prasad Singh. The property in question alongwith the number of other properties were part of estate of Maharaja Dharmendra Prasad Singh. It is alleged that the applicant alongwith one Rajit Ram used to look after the properties and estate of Maharaja Dharmendra Prasad Singh.

¶11

It is further alleged that they have manufactured a Will of Maharaja Dharmendra Prasad Singh and on that basis they initiated a mutation proceedings and got the property mutated in their name. It is further stated that there is no material to indicate that the applicant had falsified any document.

¶12

In so far as the mutation proceedings are concerned, the complainant are already contesting the same and the operation of the mutation order in civil proceedings have been stayed. It is thus urged that it is primarily a civil dispute which is being given the colour of criminal offence. Moreover, the applicant was a care-taker of the properties and in terms of the Will he is a mere legatee. He has not actively participated in execution of Will and moreover the applicant has been falsely implicated and he is in jail since 15.01.2024.

¶13

It is also stated that the applicant has explained his criminal history in paragraph 12 of the bail application and other than that as per the counter-afÏdavit filed by the State, another case has been imposed against the applicant and the said case is subsequent to the instant case.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and while drawing the attention of the Court to the report said to have been issued by the Sub Registrar, District Gonda to state that number of documents apart from the instant Will in question are said to be fraudulent.

¶15

A specific query was put to the learned A.G.A. to explain as to in what circumstances the Registrar has given his report and what was the basis upon which he concluded that the documents which inter alia includes the Will in question was found to be fraudulent. The learned A.G.A. could not give any clear reply as to what authority the Registrar had to hold that the said document was fraudulent nor there is any material which has been brought on record alongwith the counter-afÏdavit to indicate as to how the instant Will was found to be fraudulent by the Sub Registrar.

¶16

Be that as it may, this is a matter which is subject matter of civil dispute and the learned counsel for the complaint has submitted that apart from an application moved to recall the mutation order no civil proceedings seeking cancellation or declaration of the Will as null and void is instituted till date.

¶17

Considering the rival submissions, the facts and circumstances of the case and the age of the applicant, the period of his incarceration and noticing that it is primarily a civil dispute as well as considering the nature of allegations and accusation against the applicant, the severity of the punishment if convicted and the period of incarceration as well as the fact that no apprehension has been expressed by the learned AGA that the applicant is at the risk of fleeing justice or that he would tamper with evidence or influence any witness, hence, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

Let the applicant Ambika Prasad involved in Case Crime No.599 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, relating to police station Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶19

At the time of executing required sureties the following conditions shall be imposed in the interest of justice.

¶20

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶21

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may

¶22

proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶23

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶25

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶26

Order Date :- 25.7.2024 ank

¶27

Digitally signed by :- ALI NEWAZ KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ambika Prasad v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ambika Prasad v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Abdul Hamid Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Another

Ravi Bhan Shukla and Another Vs Addl. Commissioner (Judicial), Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya and Others

Deshraj Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation, Barabanki and Others

Krishna Prakash Singh vs Addl. Dist. Judge and Session Judge Dist. Gonda and 2 Others

Shiv Kumar and Another vs District Judge, Sultanpur and 2 Others

Hari Prasad and Another vs Ajeet Kumar and 3 Others