VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Allahabad High Court 2023 › High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jitendra Yadav @ Jitendra Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allowed/Partly Allowed on merits
Court
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Decided
22 November 2023
Case no.
ABAIL 12364/2023

Judgment

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12364 of 2023 Applicant :- Jitendra Yadav @ Jitendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- B.N.Singh,Manish Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised. Heard Sri Manish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri P.C. Srivastava, learned A.A.G. assisted by Sri J.K. Upadhyay and Sri Aishwarya Pratap Singh, 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. 756 of 2023, under Sections 120-B, 306, 420, 506 IPC, Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶3As per prosecution story, the applicant, who happens to be the nephew of the deceased person, in collusion with the co-accused persons namely, Dr. Priya Ranjan Anshu Diwakar, Bablu Yadav and Rahul Jain etc. is stated to have got his property sold for a paltry amount which was worth Rs. 7 crores. Only Rs. 7 lakhs are stated to have been given to the deceased person. The deceased ran from the pillar to post to get the stipulated amount, as such, had committed suicide on railway track on 9.9.2023.

¶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 the FIR is delayed by about one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Learned counsel has further stated that the inquest of the deceased person was conducted the same day and several members of the family were present there and there is not a whisper of a single word against any of the accused persons in the said inquest proceedings. It is further stated that subsequent to the said sale deed, the deceased person had filed a civil suit for cancelling the registered sale deed by filing suit no. 805 of 2023 before the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kanpur Nagar on 30.5.2023. It is next stated that the role of the applicant is stated to be of hatching the criminal conspiracy only. No direct overt act has been assigned to the applicant. The main perpetrator of crime is stated to be Dr. Priya Ranjan Anshu Diwakar and Bablu in collusion with the co-accused person Rahul Jain, who had purchased the said property. Rahul Jain has been enlarged on regular bail by this Court. The case of the applicant is at a different footing, as not a single word has been uttered against him in the said civil suit filed for cancellation of the sale deed.

¶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.A.G. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that the applicant was the main schemer, who hatched the conspiracy and fooled his uncle by getting the said sale deed executed. Learned A.A.G. has further stated that the said cheque was given back by the co-accused person, but he could not dispute the fact that the said case is of criminal conspiracy.

¶7On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the case of the applicant is of criminal conspiracy hatched to abet to commissioning of suicide by the deceased person, coupled with the fact that there is no whisper of a single word against the applicant in the civil suit filed (the case of the other co-accused persons Dr. Priya Ranjan Anshu Diwakar and Bablu stands distinguished) 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, Jitendra Yadav @ Jitendra Singh 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 :- 23.11.2023 Shalini High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Source: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.