Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Pranav Ansal vs State Of U.P.

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|17 December, 2019

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
As per the prosecution case, the complainant booked two plots in the township developed by Ansal API. One plot was measuring 310 sq. yards and other was 300 sq. yards in area. Consequently two plots were allotted to the complainant thereafter the allotment for the same were handed over to the complainant. It is further alleged that officers of the Ansal API demanded a total sum of Rs.14,00,000/-, Rs.7,00,000 each for the two plots in order to execute the sale deed. Therefore, the F.I.R. was lodged.
Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has not committed any crime. Immediately after lodging the present F.I.R. the grievance of the complainant has been settled and company has executed sale deed of both the plots which are on record as Annexure No.3 collectively to the bail application. The sale deed depicts that the company has handed over the vacant peaceful possession of the said plot to the complainant and complainant has taken over the possession of the said plot and is satisfied regarding the possession. The fact that the vendor has handed over the vacant peaceful possession of the said plot to the vendee is specifically mentioned in the sale deed. Learned counsel for applicant further submits that applicant is in jail since 04.10.2019.
It is lastly submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Sri V.K. Sahi, learned Additional Advocate General submits that as long as builders are working bonafidely and the grievances of the informant are settled then State has no objection in granting bail to such builders.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, applicant has executed the sale deed in favour of the complainant, it is categorically mentioned in the sale deed that peaceful possession of the plots has been handed over to the complainant, chargesheet has already been filed, matter is triable by Magistrate, for the period for which he is in jail and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.
Let the applicant, Pranav Ansal involved in F.I.R./Crime No. 1185/2018, under Sections 406/419/420/467/468/323/504/506 IPC, Police Station - P.G.I., District - Lucknow be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) 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.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 Shubhankar
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Pranav Ansal vs State Of U.P.

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
17 December, 2019
Judges
  • Karunesh Singh Pawar