Ram Milan Das v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11406 of 2023 Applicant :- Ram Milan Das Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Ram (Rawat),Giri Ram Rawat,Indra Deo Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

1.Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶2Apprehending his arrest in Case Crime No.99 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, IPC, Police Station Maharajganj, District Azamgarh, the applicant - Ram Milan Das has filed this anticipatory bail application seeking anticipatory bail in the aforesaid crime number.

¶3The prosecution case, in brief, is that the accused persons, by taking the informant in confidence, fraudulently transferred the property of the informant by way of impugned sale deed in favour of wife of one of the accused without payment of sale consideration and the present applicant was also a conspirator in the said transaction and money was also transferred in his bank account. F.I.R. was lodged on 22.3.2023 and investigation started, which is going on.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant submits that that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. He has been falsely implicated in this matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Investigation is going on into the matter. It is further submitted that the applicant is neither the vendor or vendee in the alleged transaction nor he is a witness to the sale deed. It is further submitted that it was wrongly mentioned in the F.I.R. that consideration amount of Rs.2,40,000/- was deposited in the bank account no.347502010021984 of the present applicant, but during the course of investigation, the I.O. has collected the evidence to the effect that in the aforesaid account number pertaining to present applicant, no money has been deposited. It is further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal antecedents to his credit. It is further submitted that co-accused Sharda and Amit & Kamla have been granted anticipatory bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.8.2023 passed in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. - 7319 of 2023 and 7321 of 2023. It is further submitted that no custodial interrogation is required in the matter. In case the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶5Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶6Applicant is cooperating with the investigation. Co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. No custodial interrogation appears to be required in the matter.

¶7In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶8In Siddharth Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, (2022) 1 Supreme Court Cases 676, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that personal liberty is an important aspect of our constitutional mandate. The occasion to arrest an accused during investigation arises when custodial investigation becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime or where there is a possibility of influencing the witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely because an arrest can be made because it is lawful does not mandate that arrest must be made. A distinction must be made between the existence of the power to arrest and the justification for exercise of it. If arrest is made routine, it can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. If the Investigating Officer has no reason to believe that the accused will abscond or disobey summons and has, in fact, throughout cooperated with the investigation, then there is no compulsion on the officer to arrest the accused.

¶9Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till the filing of police report under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court.

¶10The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶11In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till the filing of police report under section 173 (2) Cr.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 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office.

(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.

¶12In case of default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant. Order Date :- 16.10.2023 ss High Court of Judicature at Allahabad