High Court · 2025
Case Details
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 118 of 2024, under Sections 447, 511, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 IPC, Police Station- Chinhat, District- Lucknow. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that initially, the Will deed was executed in the year 2015 by Mansa Ram in favour of the present applicant and therefore, on the basis of aforesaid will deed, the applicant had executed an agreement to sale in favour of Abhay Srivastava and Jagdish Prasad and subsequently, the same was got cancelled and again the land in question was got transferred in the name of the applicant by committing cheat and fraud. He next submits that since the matter with respect to mutation of the registered will deed was sub judice before the court concerned, which was subsequently decided, therefore, an appeal was filed which is pending consideration. He further submits that the dispute, if any, is civil in nature and that has been given colour of criminality by way of lodging FIR. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance on a judgement of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Syed Yaseer Ibrahim vs. State of U.P. and another; Criminal Appeal No. 295 of 2022 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 7955 of 2021 decided on 28.02.2022. Referring the aforesaid, he submits that the case of the present applicant is squarely covered with the ratio of judgement aforesaid. He next added that the applicant has already been enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 119 of 2024 by this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 12881 of 2024 vide order dated 11.2.2025. He further added that charge-sheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper with the evidences or would threaten the witnesses. He also submits that the applicant has four cases criminal history which have been explained in the rejoinder affidavit filed today and he is languishing in jail since 6.11.2024. He further submits that the applicant undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that after thorough investigation, it was found that the applicant was involved in committing the offence and as such, charge-sheet has been filed against him. He also added that the applicant has four cases criminal history and thus, he is not entitled for any relief. Learned AGA appearing for the State has also supported the version of the counsel for the complainant. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is languishing in jail since 6.11.2024; the dispute, if any, is civil in nature and that has been given colour of criminality by way of lodging FIR; charge-sheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper with the evidences or would threaten the witnesses; the applicant has four cases criminal history which have been explained in the rejoinder affidavit filed today coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant- Shiv Raj involved in the aforementioned crime 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, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 18.2.2025 Shravan SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 118 of 2024, under Sections 447, 511, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 IPC, Police Station- Chinhat, District- Lucknow. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that initially, the Will deed was executed in the year 2015 by Mansa Ram in favour of the present applicant and therefore, on the basis of aforesaid will deed, the applicant had executed an agreement to sale in favour of Abhay Srivastava and Jagdish Prasad and subsequently, the same was got cancelled and again the land in question was got transferred in the name of the applicant by committing cheat and fraud. He next submits that since the matter with respect to mutation of the registered will deed was sub judice before the court concerned, which was subsequently decided, therefore, an appeal was filed which is pending consideration. He further submits that the dispute, if any, is civil in nature and that has been given colour of criminality by way of lodging FIR. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance on a judgement of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Syed Yaseer Ibrahim vs. State of U.P. and another; Criminal Appeal No. 295 of 2022 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 7955 of 2021 decided on 28.02.2022. Referring the aforesaid, he submits that the case of the present applicant is squarely covered with the ratio of judgement aforesaid. He next added that the applicant has already been enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 119 of 2024 by this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 12881 of 2024 vide order dated 11.2.2025. He further added that charge-sheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper with the evidences or would threaten the witnesses. He also submits that the applicant has four cases criminal history which have been explained in the rejoinder affidavit filed today and he is languishing in jail since 6.11.2024. He further submits that the applicant undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that after thorough investigation, it was found that the applicant was involved in committing the offence and as such, charge-sheet has been filed against him. He also added that the applicant has four cases criminal history and thus, he is not entitled for any relief. Learned AGA appearing for the State has also supported the version of the counsel for the complainant. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is languishing in jail since 6.11.2024; the dispute, if any, is civil in nature and that has been given colour of criminality by way of lodging FIR; charge-sheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper with the evidences or would threaten the witnesses; the applicant has four cases criminal history which have been explained in the rejoinder affidavit filed today coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant- Shiv Raj involved in the aforementioned crime 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, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 18.2.2025 Shravan SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench