Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13710 of 2021 Applicant :- Umesh Mishra & Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sadaful Islam Jafri,Nasira Adil,Nazrul Islam Jafri(Senior Adv.) Counsel for Opposite Party :- Vineet Kumar Singh,Vineet Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard Sri Nazrul Islam Jafri, learned Senior Counsel for the applicants, Sr Vineet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 994 of 2020, under Sections - 420, 406, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station - Vijay Nagar, District - Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial.
Upon consideration of the argument that applicant no.2 is 80 years old and he has not committed any fraud nor has he acted in criminal breach of trust. Allegations are in two sets and the first one itself is in favour of the applicants that they have supplied the building material, for which payment has already been made and received. In so far as the other part is concerned, it is coercive in nature and it is between the complainant and the co-accused and not between the applicants and the complainant.
Sri Vineet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that in this case a deficit of Rs. 61 lakhs has been caused to the informant and the agents are none other than so many persons including the present applicants. In so far as the supply of building material is concerned, regarding which no cash payment has been made but a sort of agreement has been entered into between the parties that when flats are purchased, the amount Rs. 43 lakhs will be adjusted in purchase of flat, but that money has also not been obtained. During the course of argument, learned counsel for the informant informs that investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed against the applicants.
In view of above, at this stage though interference would have been made notwithstanding filing of the charge sheet, if the circumstances are rare, but it is not so. Therefore, the matter does not require any interference for granting anticipatory bail. So far as the merit of the case, and the parties involved and the age of the applicant no.2 being 80 years is concerned, it is observed that the applicant may approach the regular court concerned for obtaining the regular bail by assailing its merit and the age of the applicant may also be taken into consideration but the loss caused to the informant should not be neglected by the court below and matter should be tried to be patched up between the parties because it is nothing but money transaction is involved, which is causing inconvenience to both the sides.
However, the relief sought by the applicants can be well obtained by moving appropriate regular bail application before the court concerned. Therefore, it is provided that in case the applicants appear before the court concerned and moves appropriate application for bail, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the court concerned on the same day.
With the aforesaid observation, this application stands disposed of.
The observation made herein above will have no bearing upon the merit of the case.
Order Date :- 29.7.2021 S Rawat Digitally signed by Justice Arvind Kumar Mishra Date: 2021.08.02 16:25:00 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad