Allowed

Rahul Shukla v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Dec 2019BAIL/52441/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, Rahul Shukla, in a case involving cheating and criminal breach of trust. Conditions included making himself available for interrogation, not influencing witnesses, and surrendering passport if held. Investigation was directed to be concluded within three months.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail allowed on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties.

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

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52441 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Rahul Shukla Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Krishna Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the first information report as well as rejection order.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is neither transporter nor owner of the truck from where 600 bags of wheat were misappropriated. During investigation, one Manoj driver of the truck was arrested and he disclosed that wheat laden on truck was infact sold to the applicant and two other co-accused. Learned counsel states that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the applicant and only evidence against him is confessional statement of co-accused Manoj. The applicant has no criminal history, he is ready to cooperate with the investigation. The matter needs deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to. Therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶7

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

¶8

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and having no criminal antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶9

In the event of arrest of the applicant Rahul Shukla involved in Case Crime No. 0130 of 2019, u/s 406, 419, 420, 409, 411, 120B IPC, P.S. Kuthaund, District Jalaun at Orai shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report if any under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions.

¶10

(i) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶11

(ii) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶12

(iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶13

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶14

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶15

The applicant is directed to produce a certified copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶16

Let the copy of this order be sent by the Registrar General of this Court to Sessions Judge concerned for it's compliance.

¶17

In view of the aforesaid, the application for anticipatory bail is, accordingly, allowed.

¶18

Order Date :- 3.12.2019 Dhirendra/

Rahul Shukla v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Shukla 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

Sharda Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rayees Alias Rayeesuddin and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Firoj Ahmad Khan and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shakir @ Sagir Mev Vs State of U.P.

Rishipal Vs State of Up and Another