Allowed

Rajesh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Sept 2019BAIL/36343/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A bail application in a cheating and extortion case (Sections 420, 506 IPC) was allowed. The applicant was directed to execute a personal bond with two sureties and deposit Rs. 10 lacs into the court to be released proportionately upon verification.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and deposit of Rs. 5 lacs immediately and remaining Rs. 5 lacs within two months to be released proportionately to victims.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36343 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Rajesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Kakkar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

¶6

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Rajesh in connection with Case Crime No.221 of 2019, under Sections 420, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, District Budaun.

¶7

There is allegation in the first information report that the applicant had illegally taken Rs.58 lacs from several persons for securing the Government jobs for them.

¶8

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that the without accepting the guilt, the applicant is ready to deposit Rs.10 lacs, out of which Rs.5 lacs may be given at the time of executing the bail bonds and another Rs.5 lacs may be given within two months from the date of release from the jail. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 24.06.2019 and in case, he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea.

¶10

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

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Rajesh involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

vi) The applicant will deposit Rs.5 lacs before the court concerned at the time of executing the bail bonds and another Rs.5 lacs be deposited before the court concerned within two months from the date of his release from the jail. The amount so deposited may be released proportionately from the persons whose money has been taken by the applicant after verifying the credentials.

¶20

Order Date :- 25.9.2019

¶21

R./

Rajesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh 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

Raj Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Raheesh @ Sandeep Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kumar Gupta @ Rakesh Vs State of U.P.

Karunesh Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Bhujbal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Mohit and Another Vs State of U.P.