Allowed

Vijay Verma v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2018BAIL/45200/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant, Vijay Verma, who was languishing in judicial custody since July 19, 2017. The applicant had been falsely implicated in a case involving cheating, criminal forgery, and criminal breach of trust. The court imposed stringent conditions including undertaking not to seek adjournments during evidence and directed the trial court to expedite the trial within

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties; strict conditions imposed; trial court directed to expedite trial within six months.

Vijay Verma Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45200 of 2017

¶3

Applicant :- Vijay Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Narain Pandey,Shravan Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rakesh Dubey

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Rekha Dikshit,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that accused applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. The accused-applicant is languishing in jail since 19.7.2017. It is next submitted that the applicant has no criminal history. It is further 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.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶9

Let the applicant, Vijay Verma, involved in Case Crime No.95 of 2016, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506 IPC, Police Station - Kotwali, District - Kanpur, 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:-

¶10

(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.

¶11

(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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within the period of six months, if possible, from the date of production of the certified copy of this order before the trial court.

¶15

Order Date :- 5.4.2018 KR

Vijay Verma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Verma 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

Jay Narayan @ Lalla Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Smt Saroj Devi Vs State of U.P.

Shankar Prajapati and Another Vs State of U.P.

Mahesh Vs State of U.P.

Pushpendra Singh @ Rahul Singh Vs State of U.P.and Anr.

Vipin Chauhan Vs State of U.P.