Allowed

Adil @ Mayank Sharma v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Oct 2020BAIL/1397/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous bail application, the High Court released the applicant, who was accused of cheating and criminal breach of trust, upon furnishing a personal bond and sureties. The court applied the principle under Article 21 and cited a Supreme Court dictum to grant bail subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on personal bond with two sureties in like amount, subject to specific conditions including cooperation in trial and no tampering with evidence.

Adil @ Mayank Sharma Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1397 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Adil @ Mayank Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Irshad Ahmad,Sadaful Islam Jafri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Tapan Kumar Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard Sri N. I. Jafri, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri S.I. Jafri learned counsel for the applicant, Sri T. K. Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Adil urf Mayank Sharma , with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 1894 of 2019, under Sections 406, 420 IPC and 66 I.T. Act, Police Station Kavi Nagar, District- Ghaziabad during pendency of trial.

¶7

There is allegation in the first information report against Mayank Sharma, Rajendra Kumar Bhardawaj and Pradeep Kumar regarding the offence of cheating and criminal breach of trust. It is alleged that the informant was made to deposit Rs.92,46, 359/- for the purpose of withdrawing the commission of policies. The aforesaid amount was deposited in number of bank accounts details whereof are given in the first information report.

¶8

Learned Senior Advocate for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was not named in the first information report. Subsequently he has been implicated in this case on the basis of his confessional statement before the police that he had impersonated the named accused, Mayank Sharma and got the amount deposited by the informant in number of accounts. It has further been confessed by the applicant that there was no person like Mayank Sharma. He impersonated him along with coaccused, Tabrej, who was in fact co-accused, Rajendra Kumar Bhardwaj. Learned Senior Advocate, has submitted that the confession of the applicant cannot be read against him at this stage. The Investigating Officer has falsely implicated him in this case. He is in jail since 19.09.2019 and novel corona virus is spreading in jails

¶9

also.

¶10

Learned AGA and Sri T. K. Mishra, learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant. Sri Mishra has submitted that the applicant has confessed before the police and his confession has been corroborated bydetails of the accounts, identity proofs, I.D. proofs etc. which have been recovered from the applicant. He has brought on record whats-app chat between the informant and the applicant, which are regarding direction of applicant for depositing the amount to the informant. He has futher submitted that informant has suffered huge loss on account of conduct of the applicant. He may not be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Having considered rival submissions of the parties and the material on record, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶13

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶14

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶15

In case the applicant has been enlarged on short term bail as per the order of committee constituted under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court his bail shall be effective after the period of short term bail comes to an end.

¶16

The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored. In case court below is functioning normally, this condition will not apply and applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution

¶17

of bail bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court below.

¶18

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶19

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶21

Order Date :- 1.10.2020 SS

Adil @ Mayank Sharma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adil @ Mayank Sharma 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahesh Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Yash Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Vs State of U.P.

Gajendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Babban Singh Vs State of U.P.