PRAVEEN KUMAR KATIYAR ALIAS PRAVEEN KATIYAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
NABAIL/4550/2025 · 2025-07-20
Vivek Varma
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 64476 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 64476 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:118249 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 4550 of 2025 Applicant :- Praveen Kumar Katiyar Alias Praveen Katiyar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akhil Kumar Shukla,Lalit Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Amit Kumar Yadav,G.A.,Karunesh Pratap Singh Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the counsel for the applicant, is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Karunesh Pratap Singh, counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 3. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 137 of 2024, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, Police Station Maudarwaja, District Farrukhabad. 4. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The first information report was lodged under Sections 323, 386, 447, 504, 506 IPC. In the said sections the applicant was granted bail by the Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Court No.9, Farrukhabad vide order dated 25.07.2024 passed in Bail Application No. 2654 of 2024. After investigation charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC. It is contended that the applicant is a bonafide purchaser of the land in dispute. The sale consideration was duly paid by the applicant. The applicant has not forged or manipulated any documents. The case is purely civil in nature. At this stage there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Investigation has been completed. The applicant had co-operated in the investigation. The applicant has been summoned by the concerned court. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. In case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned A.G.A. and the counsel for the informant have opposed
the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having regard to the submissions made, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, in particular the fact, that under Sections 323, 386, 447, 504, 506 IPC, the applicant was granted bail by the Addl.
District & Sessions Judge, Court No.9, Farrukhabad; after investigation charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC; the applicant is the purchaser of the land in dispute; the case is purely civil in nature; at this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence; investigation has been completed; the applicant had co-operated in the investigation, no custodial interrogation is required, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 7. In the event of arrest, the applicant Praveen Kumar Katiyar @ Praveen Katiyar, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall make himself available on each date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court; (iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport the same shall be deposited by him before the concerned court.
8. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.
9. The application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 21.7.2025 Lbm/- Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad