Allowed

Jaswant Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Mar 2024ABAIL/461/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application in a cheating and forgery FIR over a plot sale where Rs.10 lakh was allegedly paid. The applicant undertook to return the sum within 60 days, the complainant agreed to accept it, and the Court allowed anticipatory bail subject to that condition and standard safeguards.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; release on arrest on personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions including return of Rs.10,00,000 to complainant within 60 days.

Jaswant Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:26740

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 461 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Jaswant Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ambrish Kumar Pandey,Laxmi Kant Tiwari

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rama Niwas Pathak, learned counsel who has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant which is taken on record and the learned A.G.A. is also present for the State.

¶8

The instant application has been moved by the applicantJaswant Singh, in Case Crime No. 1200 of 2020, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Faizabad/Ayodhya, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail, as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

¶9

The record further indicates that a coordinate Bench of this Court by means of order dated 11.03.2024 had granted the interim protection to the applicant and the said order reads as under:-

¶10

"1. Learned AGA informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter.

¶11

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

¶12

3. The present application has been moved by the accused-applicantJaswant Singh in Case No.1200 of 2020, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Faizabad/Ayodhya, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

¶13

4. Learned counsel for the applicant while pressing the anticipatory bail application submits that it is a case of false implication. In fact, it is the applicant with whom the fraud has been committed by the complainant as it was agreed between the parties that another land would be sold to the complainant. However, by manipulation, he got the gata number of another land of the applicant written in the sale deed and on that basis has lodged a complaint in order to extract the money from the applicant.

¶14

5. It is further submitted that the applicant is not having any criminal antecedents and there is no apprehension that after being granted facility of anticipatory bail, applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶15

6. At this juncture, learned counsel for the applicant further submits that he is under instructions to make a statement that without admitting his guilt, the applicant is ready to pay Rs.10 lacs to the complainant, which is shown to have been received by him through a RTGS.

¶16

7. Without adverting to the merits and demerits of the case, having regard to the proposal given by the applicant, the service of notice on the complainant also appears to be necessary for proper adjudication of the plea of the anticipatory bail of the applicant.

¶17

8. Thus, issue notice to the opposite party No.2, returnable till 21st March, 2024. Steps be taken within next 5 days.

¶18

9. List on 21st March, 2024 in the list of fresh cases.

¶19

10. It is provided that till the next date of listing, the applicant shall not be arrested in the above-mentioned complaint case in lieu of any process issued by the trial court, subject to the further extension of this protection order under specific written order of this Court. "

¶20

The learned counsel appearing for the complainant at the outset submits that in so far as a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- as mentioned in the FIR relating to the consideration is concerned, the same could not be encashed, however, the complainant had paid a sum of Rs. 10, 00,000/- and in light of the statement given by the learned counsel for the applicant and recorded in the order passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court dated 11.03.2024, the complainant is ready to accept the aforesaid sum.

¶21

Considering the aforesaid fact that the dispute is purely civil in nature relating to sale of a plot and apparently, the complainant had paid a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- which the applicant is ready to return for which it is stated on the basis of instructions by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant shall return the aforesaid sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- to the complainant within a period of 60 days from today.

¶22

Considering the aforesaid as well as the fact that the applicant is ready to return a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- within a period of 60 days from today, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant is entitled to the benefit of the anticipatory bail and the present application is allowed in terms of the earlier order dated 11.03.2024 subject to return of the aforesaid sum within a period of 60 days from today.

¶23

In the event of arrest of the applicant- J aswant Singh involved in the aforesaid FIR/Case Crime Number, shall be released on

¶24

bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court Concerned, with the conditions:-

¶25

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

¶26

(b) that 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶27

¶28

(d) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶29

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

¶30

(f) in case the applicant misuses the liberty and does not pay the sum to the complainant as agreed, it shall be a ground to cancel the bail;

¶31

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶32

It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶33

Order Date :- 1.4.2024 Asheesh

¶34

Digitally signed by :- ASHEESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Jaswant Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaswant Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

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

Smt. Mamta Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Panchayat Raj U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Rajkumar Singh and Others vs Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow Thru. Chairman and Others

Altaf Husain @ Altaf vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Kapil Dev K.D. Singh Pvt., Industrial Training Institute, Ballia Thru. Member Premshankar Sharma vs Union of India Thru. Secy., Deptt. of Skill, Development/ Entrepreneurship Ministry and Others

Smt. Suman Devi and Others vs Sumit Agrawal and Others

Mahesh Chandra Soni vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.