Allahabad High Court
Sachin Agarwal vs State Of U.P. on 11 February, 2025
Author: Vivek Varma
Bench: Vivek Varma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:20109 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1302 of 2025 Applicant :- Sachin Agarwal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar,Nipun Singh,Swati Agrawal Srivastava,Vivek Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Akash Tomar,G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.
1. Heard Ms. Swati Agrawal Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Akash Tomar, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State. Perused the record.
2. The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Complaint Case No. 898 of 2024 (State of U.P. Vs. Sachin Agarwal and another), under Sections 323, 386, 504, 506, 406, 420, 452 IPC, Police Station Chandpur, District Bijnor during the pendency of trial.
3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is having a dealership of electronic goods and is running a firm known as M/s Laxmi Communication. The complainant is the owner of a hotel known as Dhariwal Residency. The complainant has been purchasing electronic items from the firm of the applicant for the past several years. In this regard reliance has been placed on the tax invoices. Copies of the tax invoice have been annexed as Annexure-14 to the affidavit in support of the bail application. It is next contended that the applicant had entered into an agreement with the complainant to purchase the hotel owned by the complainant. Pursuant to the said agreement the applicant had paid certain amount to the complainant. The applicant had also asked for adjustment of his outstanding bills of electronic items in the sale consideration of the Hotel Dhariwal Residency and further to execute the sale deed in favour of the applicant. The said dispute resulted in filing of the present case. The dispute is purely civil and private in nature. In fact, a business dispute has been given color of a criminal case. No medical report has been annexed along with the complaint. Criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 60 of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 04.12.2024 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.
4. Learned AGA and the counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.
5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the dispute between the parties is purely civil and private in nature. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than two months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
6. Let the applicant Sachin Agarwal, involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the conditions that he:
(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;
(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
Order Date :- 11.2.2025 Lbm/-