Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38298 of 2019 Applicant :- Bhan Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned counsel for informant, learned A.G.A. appearing for State and perused the record.
This application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by Bhan Singh for grant of anticipatory bail during the course of investigation in Case Crime No. 678 of 2019, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Naini, District Prayagraj / Allahabad.
Learned counsel for applicant argued that applicant is innocent. He himself has been duped by fraud by introducing someone else as Ankur Agarwal, identified by his family members, who had previously executed sale deed in favour of applicant, for land which was part of land in dispute. He has paid enormous amount as consideration as well as for purchase of stamp paper for getting deed executed and it was under bona fide belief, fulfilling the requirement of principle of buyer be aware given under Transfer of Property Act. He is always with informant and he assures for not interfering in possession over land in question. He had moved application before police personnel regarding offence committed with him and for making investigation of same.
Learned counsel for informant as well as learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed bail with contention that it was a case of manufacturing forged and fictitious Aadhaar Card and thereby getting the deed executed by mentioning payment in cash of Rs.1,95,000/- and this deed was executed in between those ten days when informant was at abroad. Applicant is beneficiary of same and it was a fraud under his connivance by preparing valuable security. Hence, bail be rejected.
Having heard learned counsel for both side and gone through rival contention including nature and gravity of accusation and previous application moved by applicant to police regarding deception committed towards him, it is but natural that police is going to arrest applicant, as is being said by him, then there will be sufficient evidence in investigation, which is not before this Court. Hence, in this proceeding, at this stage, the details of evidence is not to be analysed nor the same is before this Court. Rather it is the police and Investigating Officer to make value as per Section 41 of Cr.P.C.. Hence, no ground for anticipatory bail is made out.
The anticipatory bail application is accordingly rejected. Order Date :- 26.9.2019 NS