Allowed

Sonu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Oct 2018BAIL/38799/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to applicant Sonu in a cheating and forgery case. Grant was based on identical role of co-accused already granted bail, lack of prior criminal history, and fumigation of false implantation. Bail was granted with specific conditions regarding tampering with evidence and witness intimidation.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Sonu released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding evidence and witness integrity.

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

¶1

Court No. - 41

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38799 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Sonu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution case, FIR was lodged against unknown person alleging that on 15.06.2018, for chatting with college girls he cheated Rs.5,000/-.

¶7

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that co-accused namely Kalyan Singh and Vijay Singh have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.9.2018 and 4.10.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.37273 of 2018 and 38116 of 2018, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is languishing in jail since 19.06.2018 (more than three and half months) having no previous criminal history. There is no independent witness and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no previous criminal history and the case of the present applicant is identical to co-accused Kalyan Singh and Vijay Singh who has been enlarged on bail.

¶9

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant Sonu involved in Case Crime No.238 of 2018, under sections 420, 467, 468 IPC & Section 66, 67-A of the Information Technology Act, 2008, Police station Civil Lines, District Etawah, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions;

¶11

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during

¶12

the trial.

¶13

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶14

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶15

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶16

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.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶18

Order Date :- 9.10.2018

¶19

A. Singh

Sonu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu 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

Asif Javed Vs State of U.P.

Rajkumar and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Gudil @ Sushil Singh Vs State of U.P. and Others

Mohd. Shadab Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kamal Kishore Rathi Vs State

Jalim and Others Vs State of U.P.