Allowed

Raj Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Allahabad HC7 Aug 2024/6011/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a case involving cheating and forgery related to a fabricated sale deed. The court held that no case was made out against the applicant, who was a minor at the time of the offence, and the proceedings appeared to be an attempt to harass in a civil dispute.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each, subject to specified conditions regarding attendance and conduct.

Raj Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:54432

¶2

Court No. - 8

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6011 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Raj Kumar Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No. 161 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 IPC, relating to police station Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda.

¶8

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that from the bare perusal of the averments made in the FIR, no case is made out against the present applicant. It is further urged that as per the version in the FIR, a sale deed dated 15.07.1969 is said to have been fabricated. The land in question allegedly belonged to the complainant and on the basis of the fraudulent sale deed, title was claimed by the present applicant. In the aforesaid backdrop, the FIR came to be lodged.

¶9

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no concern in any manner with the alleged offence as the sale deed is said to be executed on 15.07.1969 and at that time the applicant was not even born therefore there is no possibility of being associated with the said sale deed. It is also submitted that the applicant was neither a party to the sale deed nor its witness, but after the death of his father received the land alongwith his mother as legal heir of his father by succession.

¶10

It is further urged that the complainant had

¶11

also filed a civil suit seeking cancellation of the aforesaid sale deed wherein initially a compromise was filed but thereafter the suit was dismissed for want of prosecution on 06.05.2022. Even in respect of the mutation proceedings, the order of mutation operating in favour of the applicant was recalled on 28.01.2023 and the applicant has also executed a sale deed in favour of the grand-son of the complainant. It is alleged that in the aforesaid circumstances, where the applicant who otherwise does not have any criminal history is being harassed and a civil transaction has been given a criminal colour.

¶12

It is further urged that the police has filed the chargesheet against the applicant in casual and mechanical manner ignoring its own finding and all the relevant facts. It is also submitted that coaccused Maya Devi (mother of applicant) has been released on bail by means of order dated 08.05.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.966 of 2024, copy of which has been brought on record as annexure no.18 of the bail application.

¶13

Learned AGA on the basis of the counter afÏdavit has opposed the aforesaid bail but could not dispute the fact that it is primarily a civil dispute and in so far as the suit filed by the complainant is concerned has already been dismissed in default and the applicant has also executed a sale deed in favour of the grand-son of the complainant.

¶14

Having considered the facts and circumstances and the submission made by respective parties including the nature and gravity of the accusation, the antecedents of the applicant including that he has no criminal history and no apprehension has been expressed that the applicant is at flight risk, hence, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶15

Let the applicant - Raj Kumar Verma involved in the aforesaid FIR/Case Crime Number, shall 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.

¶16

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

¶17

(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 is 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.

¶18

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

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 7.8.2024 ank

¶23

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

Raj Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vishambhar Dayal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Dharm Dev Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Deptt. of Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Nadeem Akhtar Kidwai Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lko. and 22 Others

M/S a Square, Thru. Its Proprietor Shri Ajay Pratap Singh and Another vs M/S Lucknow Producers Co-Operative Milk Union Limited, Lucknow and 3 Others

Sarwan Kumar vs Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tahsil Ramsanehighat, Barabanki and Others

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