Shambhu Yadav@Shambhunath Yadav v. State of U.P

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11666 of 2023 Applicant :- Shambhu Yadav@Shambhunath Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vishnu Swaroop Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

¶2The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 227 of 2023, under Sections 406, 420, 504, 506 and 34 IPC, Police Station Jhangha, District Gorakhpur, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶3As per prosecution story, the applicant alongwith co-accused persons Jai Kumar @ Nehru Lal Yadav and his wife Meenu Yadav are stated to have gone to the house of the applicant and agreed to sell the land, which was in the name of Meenu Yadav, as such, in certain transactions including cash, they are stated to have taken Rs. 40 lakhs and it was agreed that they shall execute the sale deed on 3.2.2023. The informant is stated to have reached the office of Registrar alongwith the stamp papers worth Rs. 42,04,000/- but neither the applicant nor the co-accused persons appeared before him, as such, he has been duped of his hard earned money to the tune of Rs. 42,04,000/-.

¶4Learned 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 no money has been transferred to his account. The amount transferred, if any, is to the account of Jai Kumar @ Nehru Lal Yadav, who happens to be the husband of the owner of the said land, Meenu Yadav.

¶5Several 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 no criminal antecedents. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶6On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶7On 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.

¶8Without 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.

¶9In the event of arrest of the applicant, Shambhu Yadav@Shambhunath 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;

¶10In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶11It 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