Allowed

Rakesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Feb 2018BAIL/1048/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application where the applicant sought release on bail in a case involving alleged cheating, forgery, and criminal breach of trust related to fraudulent house allotment schemes. The court granted bail subject to a fixed deposit of Rs.2,00,000/- and stringent conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted upon personal bond and two sureties, subject to deposit of Rs.2,00,000/- as fixed deposit receipt in court.

Rakesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1048 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed by the learned A.G.A. today in the Court is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Ramesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ravi Singh Parihar, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶7

Prosecution story in brief is that the form for allotment of the house under the schcme of Bapu Dhan Kanshiram which was submitted by the applicant with guarantee after taking Rs.2,00,000/- from the applicant and other persons while the applicant himself has submitted his form. The applicant, informant and other persons had been allotted the house and they were living in their respective house and after two years the Ghaziabad Development Authority, Ghaziabad had cancelled the allotments and ejected the allottees. Then the informant and other persons alleged to have met the applicant who again demanded Rs.12,000/- and assured that the other houses will be allotted in their way, in this way applicant deceived them.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the matter is essentially of a civil nature and has been given a cloak of criminal offence, and the present case has been filed with malafide intention to victimize and harass the applicant. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 2.12.2017.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. submitted that the money has been misappropriated by the applicant fraudulently and dishonestly by committing fraud and forgery and, therefore, he is not entitled for indulgence, and incase the applicant is released on bail, the amount in question be secured by this Court.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties as well as the undertaking given by the applicant, I am of the view that the applicant should be granted bail.

¶11

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Rakesh Kumar involved in Case Crime No.949 of 2017, under Sections

¶12

420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Kavi Nagar, District Ghaziabad 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 and also subject to prior deposit of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rs.two lakhs only) by way of Fixed Deposit Receipt or as the case may be, in the court concerned (payable in court's name), to be invested in a nationalized bank and ultimately paid to the person concerned occasioned to wrongful loss on the satisfaction of court concerned.

¶13

It is made clear that furnishing of aforesaid security by the applicant will not, in any way, prejudice the right/defence of the applicant during the trial of the case.

¶14

In case the applicant is acquitted in the present criminal case by the court of law, aforesaid security, if furnished by the applicant, shall be discharged in his favour.

¶15

(i) 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.

¶16

(ii) 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.

¶17

(iii) 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.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions or in case of default in deposition of amount as directed herein above, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail granted herein above and the applicant will be taken into custody immediately.

¶21

Order Date :- 8.2.2018 Dev/-

Rakesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramesh Kumar Patel Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Chaubey Vs State of U.P.

Ravender Vs State of U.P.

Raja Vs State of U.P.

Atif @ Ranu Vs State of U.P.

Lalu @ Kariya Kewat @ Surendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.