Allowed

Kishan Raikawar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 May 2019BAIL/20096/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail to the applicant under Sections 392 and 411 IPC. The applicant was implicated based on the co-accused's confession. Finding no incriminating recovery with specific marks or FIR naming, the court granted bail on condition of feeble sureties and adherence to bail terms.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties in like amount subject to specified conditions including appearance and no tampering.

Kishan Raikawar Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20096 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Kishan Raikawar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hare Krishna Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶5

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

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant Kishan Raikawar, who is involved in Case Crime No. 161 of 2018, under Sections 392, 411 I.P.C., P.S. Tahrauli, District Jhansi, is seeking enlargement on bail.

¶7

It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number. The applicant is not named in F.I.R.. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from his possession. His name was brought in light on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused. Hence bail has been prayed for.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

Perusal of first information report reveals that it was got lodged against two unknown miscreants. Subsequently, co-accused Santosh Dhimar was arrested on 06.11.2018 and from his possession recovery of mobile was shown. This co-accused took the name of present accused-applicant and upon this information accused-applicant was apprehended on 30.12.2018 and recovery of Rs.1700/- from him was shown, but no specific mark of identification on above money was there. Name of accused-applicant was brought in light on the basis of confessional statement made by co-accused. Accused-applicant is of no criminal antecedents.

¶10

Considering the rival submissions, nature of accusation, severity of punishment in case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, this bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Kishan Raikawar , involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing

¶12

a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned, subject to following conditions:

¶13

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶14

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶15

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶16

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶17

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶18

Order Date :- 14.5.2019

¶19

Kishan Raikawar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishan Raikawar 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

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.

Lalit Mohan Bhatt Vs State of U.P.

Annu @ Anoop Batham Vs State of U.P.