Allowed

Smt Saroj Devi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Apr 2018BAIL/5016/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail to the applicant under Sections 419, 420, 468, 504, 506 IPC in a cheating and forgery case on grounds of parity with co-accused, ordering personal bond and imposing conditions to ensure attendance and prevent abuse of liberty.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

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

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5016 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Smt Saroj Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mahesh Kumar Tripathi

¶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 has submitted that accused applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the case of the applicant is identical to the case of co-accused, who have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 06.01.2016 and 04.05.2016, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. The accused applicant is languishing in jail since 30.12.2017. It is next submitted that the applicant is not a previous convict. 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, she 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, namely, Smt Saroj Devi involved in Case Crime No.270 of 2015, under Sections 419, 420, 468, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Seepri Bazar, District Jhansi, be released on bail on her 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 she 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 her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her 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 her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is

¶13

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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(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 her in accordance with law.

¶15

Order Date :- 4.4.2018 Anupam S/-

Smt Saroj Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Saroj Devi 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

Vikram Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Sonkar Vs State of U.P.

Ram Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Zahid @ Lambu Vs State of U.P.

Shripal Alias Raju Vs State of U.P.

Smt Shobha @ Geeta Vs State of U.P.