Allowed

Smt. Surati Devi and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Jan 2025ABAIL/261/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-paragraph order grants anticipatory bail to applicants facing charges of cheating and forgery. The court found no prima facie case and released them on bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to applicants on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each, subject to specific conditions.

Smt. Surati Devi and Another vs State of U.P. and… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:6797

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 261 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Smt. Surati Devi And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Sri Vijay Kumar, learned AGA-I, for the State, apprised the Court that he has received the instructions, therefore, the instant anticipatory bail application may be finally disposed off.

¶7

Heard Sri Vijendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Vijay Kumar, learned AGA-I, for the State.

¶8

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No. 534 of 2023, under Sections 419,420,467,468,471 and 120-B IPC, Police Station Gagaha, District Gorakhpur during pendency of the trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that on the basis of false allegation applicants have been made accused in the present matter and they did not commit any fraud and cheating as alleged.

¶10

He further submits that applicants are the bona fide purchaser and they were not aware that the co-accused who sold the property to them, was not the owner of the property.

¶11

He further submits that present dispute attracts civil liability and no criminal liability against the applicants could be fastened.

¶12

It is next submitted that co-accused Suresh Maurya, who executed the sale deed in favour of the applicants has already been

¶13

released on anticipatory bail by this Court and his bail order has been annexed at page 86 of the paper book.

¶14

He further submits that however, FIR of the present case was lodged on 26.8.2023 but investigation is still pending and Police is now trying to arrest the applicants.

¶15

He further submits that therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case argued above, applicants should be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶16

He further submits that applicants are not having any previous criminal history to their credit except the instant matter.

¶17

Per contra, learned AGA although opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants.

¶18

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶19

However, as per allegation co-accused Suresh Maurya executed the sale deed of the property in favour of applicants which did not belong to him but from the allegation made against the applicants, it cannot be said that he was not the bona fide purchaser.

¶20

Further, contention raised by the learned counsel for the applicants that prima facie dispute appears to be civil dispute, cannot be completely ruled out at this stage.

¶21

Further, applicants are not having any previous criminal history and co-accused Suresh Maurya, who executed the sale deed in favour of the applicants, has already been released on anticipatory bail by this Court.

¶22

Further, considering the fact that investigation with regard to

¶23

the applicants is still pending, apprehension of arrest raised by applicants cannot be disbelieved.

¶24

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of the trial.

¶25

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail anticipatory application is allowed.

¶26

In the event of arrest of the applicant -Smt. Surati Devi and Vinod involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of the trial case on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court concerned with the conditions:-

¶27

(i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶28

(ii) that the applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶29

(iii) that the applicants shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶30

(iv) that the applicants shall not temper with the evidence during the trial;

¶31

(v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶32

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

¶33

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court

¶34

concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicants.

¶35

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

¶36

Order Date :- 16.1.2025 SKM

¶37

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Surati Devi and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Surati Devi and Another 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

Similar cases

Rizwan vs State of U.P.

Braham Singh vs State of Up

Tarikat vs State of U.P.

Anas Jahir Alias Anas Tahir vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Lal Yadav vs State of U.P.

Abhiramjeet Yadav vs State of U.P.