Allowed

Rajesh Kuamar Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Jun 2020BAIL/15166/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding cheating and forgery charges, Hon'ble Ali Zamin, J. granted bail to the applicant. The court framed specific conditions covering cooperation with evidence, attendance for crucial stages, and penalties for abuse of liberty under IPC and Cr.P.C. sections.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions of presence and non-tampering with evidence.

Rajesh Kuamar Singh Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 43

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15166 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Rajesh Kuamar Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Srivastava,Bhaju Ram Pprasad Sharma

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 505 of 2018, under Sections 406, 419, 420 468 I.P.C., P.S. Line Bazaar, District Jaunpur.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that twelve cases of similar nature have been lodged against the applicant. Applicant was Director of the Company known as J.K.V. Land Developers and Infrastructure Limited. He has been released on bail either by this Court or Lucknow Bench of this Court in Case Crime No. 216 of 2018, under Sections 406, 420, 409, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Gudamba, District Lucknow in Bail No. 3488 of 2019 (Rajesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P.) vide order dated 04.12.2019, in FIR No. 134 of 2018, under Sections 406, 420 I.P.C., P.S. Husainganj, District Lucknow in Bail N0. 5893 of 2019 (Rajesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P.) vide order dated 14.06.2019, in Case Crime No.565 of 2018, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) Gha of S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Gudumba, District Lucknow in Criminal Appeal No. 1158 of 2019 (Rajesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Anr,.) vide order dated 30.08.2019, in Case Crime No. 567 of 2018, under Sections 323/406/420/467/468/471/504/506 I.P.C and Section 3(1) (Gha) of S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Gudumba, District Lucknow in Criminal Appeal No. 1159 of 2019 (Rajesh Kumar Singh Vs.State of U.P. and others) vide order dated 30.08.2019, in Case Crima No. 367 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Bhadohi, District Bhadohi in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15283 of 2020 (Rajesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P.) vide order dated 19.06.2020 and in Case Crime No. 340 of 2019, under Sections 420, 406 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Mahoba, District Mahoba in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15012 of 2020 (Rajesh Kumar Singh Vs. Statet of U.P.) vide order dated 22.06.2020. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is

¶9

enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that applicant is languishing in jail since 22.02.2019.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but he has not disputed the fact that the applicant has retired in the year 2012 and in the similar cases he has been enlarged on bail.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Rajesh Kumar Singh involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶12

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶13

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order

¶17

downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 22.6.2020 MAA/-

Rajesh Kuamar Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kuamar Singh 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 Babu Patel Vs State of Up and Another

Supria Mishra Vs State of Up and 3 Ors.

Pawan Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Rajesh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ram Babu and Another Vs State of U.P.and Another

Sukhram Vs State of U.P.