Allowed

Awadhesh Kumar @ Sheelu Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Sept 2019BAIL/36393/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Awadhesh Kumar in a criminal case involving cheating, forgery, and computer crime. The court held it to be a fit case for bail following counsel submissions, subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties with conditions against tampering, intimidation, and committing similar offences.

Awadhesh Kumar @ Sheelu Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36393 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Awadhesh Kumar @ Sheelu Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Tripathi,Anupama Tripathi 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 Awadhesh Kumar @ Sheelu Kumar in connection with Case Crime No.774 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 411 I.P.C. and section 66-C of I.T.Act, P.S. Akbarpur, District Kanpur Dehat.

¶7

The first information report of this incident was lodged by the SubInspector of police mentioning therein that on 30.12.2018 in Kasba Akbarpur near ICICI ATM Booth arrested one Mahendra Singh, who during investigation told the police that the applicant along with other co-accused used to saw the pin number of the persons inside the ATM Booth, who are withdrawing the money from the ATM and he also admitted that they also exchange the ATM Card of the persons, who are withdrawing the money with the forged ATM Card.

¶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 name of the applicant has surfaced during investigation in the statement of Mahendra Singh, who was arrested at the spot by the police and nothing incriminating was recovered from the possession of the applicant. He submitted that all the offences are triable by the court of Magistrate. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 16.01.2019 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 Awadhesh Kumar @ Sheelu Kumar 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 to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

Order Date :- 18.9.2019

¶19

R./

Awadhesh Kumar @ Sheelu Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Awadhesh Kumar @ Sheelu Kumar 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

Ram Kishore Maurya Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Kaushalya Devi Vs State of U.P.

Rapsan Vs State of U.P.

Yogendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Vedpal Vs State of U.P.

Nekse Vs State of U.P.