Allowed

Vijay Karan Rajpoot v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Nov 2020BAIL/26398/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application in a cheating and forgery case. The court found the informant had not directly alleged the applicant's involvement and, considering the spread of the novel coronavirus in jails and Apex Court precedents, granted bail subject to conditions including furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to specific conditions including verification of the order.

Vijay Karan Rajpoot Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26398 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Vijay Karan Rajpoot Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manvendra Singh,Rajkishore Singh,Santosh Kumar Nigam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Harsh Kumar Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Prabha Shankar Mishra and Shri Raj Kishore Singh, learned counsels for the applicant and learned A.G.A. Shri Harsh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant through Video Conferencing.

¶6

There is allegation against the applicant in the First Information Report that he has pledged fake ornaments before Anand Swaroop Rastogi and taken cheque of Rs. two lacs.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that no ornaments were pledged before the informant by the applicant and no cheque was taken by the applicant from the informant.The person who has given a cheque to the applicant has not lodged any First Information Report.The applicant is in jail since 12.7.2020 and has no criminal history.

¶7

Counter affidavit has been filed by the learned counsel for the informant and submitted that gold was pledged to number of jewelers and cheques were issued to all the accused persons, including the applicant.He has pointed out to the receipt signed by the applicant and other accused persons.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.

¶9

After considering the rival contentions, this court finds that informant has not made any allegation against the applicant.The allegation has been made against the applicant that he cheated one Ananad Swaroop Rastogi.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, argument advanced on behalf of the parties, spreading of novel corona virus in jails, evidence

¶11

on record regarding complicity of the accused, 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, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant, Vijay Karan Rajpoot, who is involved in Case Crime No. 456 of 2020, under Sections 419,420,467,468,471,504,506 I.P.C, Police Station-Kotwali , District- Fatehpur, 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶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 court below is functioning normally, this condition will not apply and applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of bail bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court below.

¶18

The party shall file computer generated copy of

¶19

such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶20

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.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 11.11.2020 Atul kr. sri.

Vijay Karan Rajpoot v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Karan Rajpoot 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

Harigovind @ Rinku Chaudhary Vs State of U.P.

Shahnawaj @ Shanna Vs State of U.P.

Laxman Vs State of U.P.

Talib Vs State of U.P.

Guljar Vs State of U.P.

Akib Vs State of U.P.