Allowed

Sanjeev Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC29 Sept 2020BAIL/21537/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a criminal bail application filed by a bank employee charged with misappropriation. The court granted bail on a personal bond and sureties, relying on Article 21 and a Supreme Court precedent, while imposing standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail upon executing a personal bond and providing two sureties each in the like amount.

Sanjeev Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21537 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Order on Criminal Misc. Exemption Application

¶7

This exemption application is allowed.

¶8

Order on Criminal Misc. Bail Application

¶9

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Sanjeev Kumar, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 466 of 2020 under Sections 419, 420, 409 I.P.C., Police Station- Cantt., District- Varanasi, during pendency of trial.

¶10

The applicant has been implicated for misappropriation of Rs. 21,46,857.34/- of the bank. He is stated to be the Branch Manager and hence, implicated. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the implication has been made without any enquiry or opportunity of hearing. The applicant is serving in the bank since 2008 and has unblemished record of service. He has been falsely implicated in this case without any opportunity of hearing. He has no criminal history to his credit and is in jail since 31.05.2020.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant.

¶12

Having considered 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 :-

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

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 the court below is functioning normally, this condition will not apply and the applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal 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 :- 29.9.2020 KS

Sanjeev Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjeev 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Naresh Mandal Vs Union of India

Pramod Kumar Tyagi Vs State of U.P.

Tarun Vs State of U.P.

Shyam Sunder Singh Vs State of U.P.

Vipin Tyagi @ Amit @ Raju Vs State of U.P.