Allowed

Lalit Mohan Bhatt v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 May 2019BAIL/20092/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held that the bail application filed by Lalit Mohan Bhatt in a cheating case involving misappropriation of funds is a fit case for bail, subject to standard conditions, dismissing only the merits of the accusation.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant to be released on bail on executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties subject to undertakings to not tamper with evidence or harass witnesses.

Lalit Mohan Bhatt Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20092 of 2019

¶2

Applicant :- Lalit Mohan Bhatt Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bharat Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶4

This is an application for bail on behalf of the applicant, Lalit Mohan Bhatt, in connection with Case Crime No. 118 of 2019, under Sections 420, 406, 411 IPC, P.S. Govind Nagar, District Mathura.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶6

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that allegations in FIR are to the effect that applicant posing as functionary of a company who are interested in evading income tax, called up informant over his mobile saying that they would transfer Rs. ten lacs to the informant's account, but as security he would have to give them Rs. one lac in advance. Later on, after the company had settled their income tax issues they would take back Rs. five lacs and leave back Rs. five lacs with the informant in consideration for his services. It is said that informant called applicant over to Mathura and gave applicant and his companions a sum of Rs. one lac in cash. It is further alleged that applicant said that the informant would soon receive a credit of Rs. ten lacs to his account but the informant did not receive the promised money in his account or elsewhere. He has alleged that the applicant and his companions have cheated him of a sum of Rs. one lac.

¶7

Learned counsel for applicant has urged that allegations are absolutely baseless. Applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case crime number in connivance with local police, who got him arrested with recovery of a mobile phone and Rs. 16,000/- that belongs to him. It is further submitted that the applicant is a respectable citizen, who has been defrauded by informant and his companions, who are cheats, acting in connivance with the police authorities at Mathura. Learned counsel for accused-applicant submitted that co-accused, Bishwambhar Dayal, has already been enlarged on bail, in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 16725 of 2019 and the accusation against the present accused-applicant is of much lesser degree than the co-accused Bishwambhar Dayal.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail with this contention that there is recovery of a mobile phone and Rs.16,000/- from the accused-applicant.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the gravity of the offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court, finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶10

The bail application, accordingly, stands allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant- Lalit Mohan Bhatt , involved in aforesaid case crime number, be released on bail on executing his personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶12

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶13

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶14

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

¶15

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

¶16

v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.

¶18

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. It is further clarified that the trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶19

Order Date :- 14.5.2019 NS

Lalit Mohan Bhatt v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalit Mohan Bhatt 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nishar Ahamad @ Raju and Another Vs State of U.P.

Pitambar Vs State of U.P.

Sushil Rajvansi Vs State of U.P.

Shailendra Rai Vs State of U.P.

Kishan Raikawar Vs State of U.P.

Annu @ Anoop Batham Vs State of U.P.