Allowed

Govind Prajapati Alias Govind Ramkishor Prajapati v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Jan 2025ABAIL/340/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application in a cheating-forgery FIR over an allegedly fake sale deed, where the applicant was only a marginal witness with no criminal history and pending investigation. Court granted anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till conclusion of trial on personal bond with two sureties, subject to standard conditions including availability for interrogation and non-tampering.

Govind Prajapati Alias Govind Ramkishor Prajapati vs… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:7596

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 340 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Govind Prajapati Alias Govind Ramkishor Prajapati 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 Imran Khan, learned AGA, 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 Virendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA, for the State.

¶8

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

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on the basis of false allegation applicant has been made accused in the present matter along with others and only allegation against him is that he is the marginal witness in the alleged fake sale deed executed by co-accused.

¶10

He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history to his credit.

¶11

It is further submitted that however, FIR of the present case was lodged on 26.8.2023 but till date investigation with regard to

¶12

applicant could not be completed and with regard to applicant investigation is still pending and now Police is trying to arrest the applicant.

¶13

He further submits that even from the facts of the case it appears that the present dispute attracts only civil liability.

¶14

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 applicant.

¶15

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

¶16

Considering the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that applicant is only marginal witness in the alleged fake sale deed and apprehension of arrest raised by applicant cannot be ruled out considering the fact that investigation with regard to the applicant is still pending and applicant is not having any previous criminal history, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of the trial.

¶17

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

¶18

In the event of arrest of the applicant -Govind Prajapati @ Govind Ramkishor Prajapati involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of the trial 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:-

¶19

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

¶20

(ii) 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.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

It is made clear that the 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.

¶27

Order Date :- 17.1.2025 SKM

¶28

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

Govind Prajapati Alias Govind Ramkishor Prajapati v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Govind Prajapati Alias Govind Ramkishor Prajapati 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

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

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

Rizwan vs State of U.P.

Ram Lal Yadav vs State of U.P.

Abhiramjeet Yadav vs State of U.P.

Vivek Chaturvedi vs State of U.P.