Allowed

Babu Ram Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC7 Aug 2024ABAIL/7466/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC was allowed for Babu Ram Sharma in a case concerning disputed land and alleged offences of cheating and forgery. No criminal antecedents or societal harm were demonstrated.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties on specific conditions.

Babu Ram Sharma vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:133617

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7466 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Babu Ram Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Surat Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA and perused the material available on record.

¶7

The present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant - Babu Ram Sharma in Criminal Case No.869 of 2024 (State Vs. Babu Ram Sharma and others) arising out of Case Crime No.1002 of 2015, under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., Police Station - Sihani Gate, District - Ghaziabad.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as per allegation in the First Information Report, it is alleged that informant had purchased one land in the year 2005 from a power of attorney holder which was signed by the original owner. Thereafter, it has come into light that aforesaid land was already sold by the applicant as a registered power of attorney holder of the original owner of the land. It is submitted that power of attorney in favour of applicant was registered document and the civil suit between the parties in respect of land in dispute is already pending before the court concerned. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that in the present case, charge sheet has been submitted and neither the statement of original owner of land has been recorded nor he has been shown as witness. Only the purchaser of land has been as witness. There is no other witness. It is submitted that there is no evidence that original owner of the land property in question has not executed the power of attorney in favour of applicant. It is further submitted by learned counsel for applicant that if the applicant is enlarged on anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the liberty and cooperate with the investigation. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest by the police any time.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer but does not dispute the factual matrix.

¶10

It is not shown by learned AGA that the offence in question will have impact on society at large. It is not shown that act causes harm to the society. The accusations arise out of dispute between individuals. It is not shown by learned AGA that the nature and gravity of allegations are such that the same would disentitle the applicant for relief of anticipatory bail. Learned AGA has not raised concern that any prejudice would be caused to free, fair and full investigation in the event the applicant is granted anticipatory bail. No material, facts, circumstances or concern been shown by learned AGA for the State that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses or accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or that accused will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence.

¶11

Learned Counsel for opposite parties has not placed any criminal antecedents of the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history.

¶12

It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA for the State.

¶13

In view of the above, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail in respect of offence described in para 2 of the present order. In the event of arrest of the applicant, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police office as and when required.

¶15

(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 him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office.

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court concerned.

¶17

(iv) In the event, the applicant changes residential address, the applicant shall inform the court concerned/Investigating Officer about new residential address in writing.

¶18

(v) The applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required.

¶19

(vi) The applicant shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police.

¶20

(vii) The applicant shall maintain law and order.

¶21

(viii) The applicant shall at the time of execution of the bond, furnish his address and mobile number to investigating officer, and the court concerned.

¶22

(ix) The applicant shall regularly remain present during the trial, and cooperate with the Court to complete the trial for the above offences.

¶23

(x) Non presence of the applicant or his counsel before the court concerned shall be construed as violation of the present order and the court concerned would be at liberty to take coercive measures in accordance with law.

¶24

In case of default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant.

¶25

With the directions made above, the anticipatory bail application stands allowed .

¶26

Order Date :- 21.8.2024

¶27

D. Tamang

¶28

Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA TAMANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Babu Ram Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Ram Sharma v. State of U.P. 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

Bhishma Pitamah and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahis Ahmad and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikul Kumar vs State of U.P.

Kamla Gaund vs State of U.P.

Ajay Kumar vs State of U.P.

Kaleem vs State of U.P. and Another