SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Surendra Kumar Raidas vs State Of U.P. on 7 December, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 81

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 54273 of 2019

Applicant :- Surendra Kumar Raidas

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Thakur Prasad Dubey

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

Heard Sri Thakur Prasad Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri G. P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

This Anticipatory Bail Application (under Section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved for seeking bail in Case Crime No. 385 of 2019, under Section 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Manjhanpur, District Kaushambi.

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Earlier the applicant had moved an application on 13.09.2019 under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to register case against the informant of this case Deep Chandra Kesharwani and his companion Punit Verma and two police officers i.e. one SHO and one constable, under Section 419, Section420, Section467, Section468, Section323, Section504 Section506 I.P.C. 3(1)X of S.C./SectionS.T. Act, P.S. Manjhanpur, District Kaushambi and thereafter by way of retaliation the informant Deep Chandra Kesharwani has initiated the present false case against the applicant stating therein that the applicant had taken Rs. 1,50,000/- advance money (bayana) on 10.05.2018 in respect of sale of land purchase for residential house but the informant being of higher caste, the said sale deed could not be executed without D.M.’s permission, then the accused had assured him that he would seek permission for the same and thereafter would execute the sale deed. In the meantime, the accused applicant sold the said property, cheating the informant, in favour of one Saroj of his own caste. Thereafter, the informant demanded his money back, it was not paid. It is further submitted that the said allegation is absolutely false. No such amount (Rs. 1,50,000/-) was ever taken by the applicant as mentioned in the F.I.R. If the accused applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the investigation.

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the granting of anticipatory bail.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the fact that he has no criminal antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Surendra Kumar Raidas involved in Case Crime No. 385 of 2019, under Section 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Manjhanpur, District Kaushambi, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173 (2) SectionCr.P.C. before the competent Court on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

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

(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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

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

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.

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 applicant.

The applicant is directed to produce a certified copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

In view of aforesaid, the application for anticipatory bail is, accordingly, allowed.

Order Date :- 7.12.2019

VPS

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation