Allowed

Kalicharan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Oct 2024ABAIL/9997/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application regarding false implication in a property dispute, the Allahabad High Court directed the release of the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. with conditions for interrogation, non-interference, and passport deposit, citing Supreme Court precedent.

What did the court decide?

Released on anticipatory bail till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C./193(3)(i) BNSS with conditions of interrogation availability, non-inducement, and no exit from India.

Kalicharan vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:179871

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9997 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Kalicharan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Chandra Mathur Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

This anticipatory bail application has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 291 of 2024, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Vrindavan, District- Mathura, till the conclusion of trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. On perusal of contents of first information report, no offence under alleged sections is made out against the applicant and instant dispute pertains to a civil nature dispute. Applicant has sold his property to one Kavita. All allegations alleged in the first information report, are false and baseless. Applicant has no criminal history to his credit. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant is apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation.

¶9

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant with the contention that the applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail as prima facie case is made out. The apprehension of the applicant is not founded on any material on record, only on the basis of imaginary fear, the anticipatory bail cannot be granted.

¶10

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case for the limited period considering the exception considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98.

¶11

Let the applicant- Kalicharan , who is involved in the aforesaid crime, be released on anticipatory bail till submission of police report U/s 173(2) Cr.P.C./193(3) (i) BNSS , on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶12

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

¶13

(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;

¶14

(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 them before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶15

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

¶16

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicants.

¶17

The application stands allowed .

¶18

Order Date :- 18.11.2024 Aditya

¶19

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

Kalicharan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalicharan v. State of U.P.

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

Sandeep Singh @ Teetu and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Hari Shankar Tiwari vs State of U.P. and Another

Nadeem Khan vs State of U.P. and Another

Hariram Sahu and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Kuldeep Kumar Vishwkarma vs State of U.P. and Another

Arif Ali vs State of Up