Partly allowed

Purushottam Agrawal v. State of Up

Allahabad HC23 Oct 2024ABAIL/10288/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This interim order grants anticipatory bail to the applicant pending the hearing of the main application. The applicant is released on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and must satisfy six specific conditions regarding interrogation, inducement, travel, and attendance.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail granted on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties in the like amount, subject to specified conditions.

Purushottam Agrawal vs State of Up — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10288 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Purushottam Agrawal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mrityunjay Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Sri Shekhar Gangal, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the informant, which is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned counsel for the informant; learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case Crime No. 294 of 2023, under Sections 420 and 406 I.P.C., P.S. Khair, District Aligarh, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Applicant is purchaser of property in dispute. Allegation alleged in the first information report is that vendor has sold the informant's share to vendee. During investigation, applicant has co-operated with the investigation and now Investigating Officer has submitted charge-sheet and learned Magistrate has taken cognizance vide order dated 03.09.2024. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would co-operate with the investigation. Applicant has definite apprehension of his arrest by the police.

¶9

Learned counsel for the informant is granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks' thereafter.

¶10

List this case immediately after expiry of the aforesaid period.

¶11

As an interim protection, till the next date of listing fixed for hearing on this application, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each

¶12

in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required;

¶14

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

¶15

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India 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./C.P./A.C.P concerned.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

(v) The applicant shall not pressurized/intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

(vi) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 23.10.2024 Aditya

¶21

Digitally signed by :- ADITYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Purushottam Agrawal v. State of Up

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Purushottam Agrawal v. State of Up

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Farhan Ahmad vs State of U.P. and Another

Raju Saini vs State of U.P.

Ghanshyam Verma vs State of U.P. and Another

Jitendra Singh Yadav @ Khandhak Singh Yadav vs State of U.P.

Smt Mamta vs State of U.P.

Javed Waris Khan vs State of U.P. and Another