Allahabad High Court
Netrapal Singh vs State Of U.P. on 17 November, 2022
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 78 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11309 of 2022 Applicant :- Netrapal Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nitin Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard Sri Nitin Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Smt. Ladli Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Complaint Case No.271 of 2013, under Sections 420, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Nawabganj, District Farrukhabad, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
As per prosecution story, the applicant in collusion with the main accused Satyabhan are stated to have executed a forged sale-deed and duped the informant of his hard earned money.
Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive. He is the nephew of the main accused Satyabhan Singh and has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. He is a marginal witness to the alleged sale-deed. The original place of residence of the applicant is district Mainpuri though he resides at Delhi. He had come to see his ailing maternal uncle and has been falsely implicated in the case. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.
On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.
Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may be adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.
In the event of arrest of the applicant, Netrapal Singh involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail 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 that:-
1. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
2. 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;
3. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;
4. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
5. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
6. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.
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.
Order Date :- 17.11.2022 Siddhant