Ram Narayan Yadav v. State of U.P

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11343 of 2023 Applicant :- Ram Narayan Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pramod Kumar Maurya Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶2Heard Sri Dhirendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pramod Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

¶3The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case No. 164348 of 2021, arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0076 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 406, 506 IPC, Police Station Jhangha, District Gorakhpur, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶4As per prosecution story, an agreement was entered into between the applicant and the informant to sell the land, as such, at the time of the said agreement, Rs. 12 lakhs were given to the applicant. The applicant did not execute the said agreement to sell the land. The matter was settled down, as the applicant gave a cheque of the said amount to the informant, but the said cheque is stated to have been dishonoured, as such, he has been duped of his hard earned money.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and has the apprehension of his arrest. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has next stated that the said case u/s 138 Negotiable Instruments Act has been converted into criminal one.

¶6Several 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 a criminal history of three cases, which stands explained vide supplementary affidavit. Out of the said three cases, he has applied for bail before this Court in two of them, while in one case, he is on bail. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶7On the other hand, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8On 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.

¶9Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.

¶10In the event of arrest of the applicant, Ram Narayan Yadav involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial 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:- i. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; ii. 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; iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court; iv. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; vi. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶11In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶12It 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. (Justice Krishan Pahal) Order Date :- 6.11.2023 Shalini High Court of Judicature at Allahabad