Allowed

Neel Kamal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC18 Dec 2024ABAIL/2209/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in an FIR alleging fraud under Sections 419/420/504 IPC. The applicant, a company agent, undertook to cooperate in the trial and submit to the trial court's order.

What did the court decide?

Directed to surrender before trial court within twenty days; to be released on anticipatory bail on personal bond and two sureties.

Neel Kamal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2209 of 2024 Applicant :- Neel Kamal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanat Singh,Sudhir Kumar,Suhail Kashif Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶4

The applicant has moved the present application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.439 of 2022 under Sections 419, 420, 504 I.P.C. Police Station Mahmudabad, District Sitapur.

¶5

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

¶6

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the applicant while working as agent in L.L.C. namely Multi Agro Co-Operative company Mahmudabad District Sitapur several persons invested their money through him and the similar agents. Their money has been duped with the collusion of Director Sangam Berma. They have denied to return the money.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that co-accused Mahesh Shukla who was assigned similar role has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 23.09.2024 passed in CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1977 of 2024.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that charge sheet has been filed. During investigation, the applicant has not been arrested. Offence is triable by magistrate. The applicant was Branch Manager/Agent of company. It is submitted that the applicant is innocent. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

¶9

Two weeks' time is granted to learned AGA to file objections/ counter affidavit.

¶10

List on 09.01.2025.

¶11

Considering the submission advanced and the fact that coaccused Mahesh Shukla has been granted anticipatory bail; the offence is triable by Magistrate, the applicant was branch manager/agent in the company and during investigation he has not been arrested as well as 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.

¶12

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.

¶13

(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;

¶14

(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶15

(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶16

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

¶17

(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 18.12.2024/R.C.

¶20

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Neel Kamal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neel Kamal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Rajesh Kumar Patel vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Chandu vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Satyam Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Govt. Lko.

Sunil Yadav and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Surya Bhan Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Suresh Tiwari @ Suresh Kumar Tiwari and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another