Allowed

Irfanuddin v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Aug 2020BAIL/2248/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted bail to the applicant, Irfanuddin, in a cheating and forgery case wherein he alleged forgery in bail bonds and incarceration since Dec 2018. He is released under personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions, pending restoration of court functionality.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties, subject to specified conditions including submission of verified copy of order.

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

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2248 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Irfanuddin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Madan Mohan Jain Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

The second bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Irfanuddin, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 3563 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Matsena, District- Firozabad, during pendency of trial.

¶7

Allegation against the applicant is of forgery in submission of bail bonds and sureties before the court below. This second bail application has been filed on the ground that applicant is languishing in jail since 17.12.2018, but as yet the trial has not commenced. The order-sheet of the court below up to February, 2020, has been brought on record, which shows that the trial has not commenced. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit and is in jail since 17.12.2018.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant.

¶9

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 :-

¶10

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

¶11

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely

¶12

without seeking any adjournment.

¶13

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

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 5.8.2020 Ruchi Agrahari

Irfanuddin v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Irfanuddin 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arun and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sudhanshu Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Ajmeri Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Rekha and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Krishnakant Raghav @ K.K.Raghav @ Kedar Raghav Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Kumar Saxena Vs State of U.P.