Anticipatory bail application for an accused charged with cheating and criminal conspiracy over a plot allegedly resold after being sold earlier, charge sheet already filed. Court granted anticipatory bail subject to surrender within twenty days and conditions including cooperation in trial.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10598 of 2024
Applicant :- Gaurav Goyal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Singh,Rajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
The applicant has moved the present application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying for grant of anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 287/2023, under sections 420/120 IPC, P.S. Nai Mandi, district Muzaffar Nagar.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the informant purchased a plot No. 841/1, measuring 101.11 square yard in District Muzaffar Nagar from Seema Sharma through registered sale deed on 16.05.2013. It is further alleged that the said plot of land has been sold by the accused persons by hatching conspiracy in favour of Smt. Rajjo.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the offence is punishable up to seven years. Charge sheet has been filed. He has cooperated in the investigation. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has been assigned role of hatching conspiracy. The applicant is the only marginal witness. He has been falsely implicated. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial.
Two weeks' time is granted to learned AGA to file objections/ counter affidavit.
Issue notice to respondent No.2.
List on 11.12.2024.
On due consideration to the nature of allegation levelled on the applicant; material collected by the prosecution and the gravity of the offence, coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case in the light of judgment of Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 , subject to his cooperation in the trial.
In view of the above, the accused applicant is directed to surrender before trial court within twenty days from today. The accused applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with the following conditions.
(i) 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 tamper with the evidence;
(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;
It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 19.11.2024/RC
Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant accused under sections 420/120 IPC in a plot resale conspiracy case is entitled to anticipatory bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and anotherRelied on¶12
(2020)5 SCC 1 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Gaurav Goyal
State of U.P.
Karunesh Singh Pawar
As recorded by the court registry
4 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
