Allowed

Diwakar Kasaudhan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Feb 2020BAIL/3207/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under various IPC and Prevention of Corruption Act sections, the court released the applicant on the furnishing of a personal bond and two sureties, distinguishing his case from a co-accused directly involved in forging documents.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on a personal bond with two reliable sureties of the like amount, subject to conditions regarding tampering with evidence and appearance in court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3207 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Diwakar Kasaudhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwani Kumar Srivastava,R.D. Tiwari

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶6

Heard Sri M.D.Singh " Shekhar ", learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ashwani Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicantDiwakar Kasaudhan in Case Crime No.358 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 409, 120-B, 204, 474 I.P.C. and 7/13 of Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Bansgaon, District-Gorakhpur with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶8

The prosecution case as contained in the F.I.R. in brief is that in Tehsil Bansgaon, District Gorakhpur in respect of Gata Nos.1534, 1536, 1570 and 1572 which were State property, some area was acquired. However, the applicant some how in collusion with staff of the Revenue Department had got the same transferred in his favour, fraudulently. The aforesaid property was acquired by the State Government for constructing NH29 and applicant's father has received compensation of Rupees four crores. On enquiry, it was revealed that in fact, the property which was acquired by the government was got entered in name of applicant's father by Tehsildar , after manipulation and forgery, after which some money was disbursed to family members of revenue officials who were also accused in the present case. It is stated that applicant's father after committing forgery received compensation from the revenue department causing huge loss to the State Exchequer. The applicant was also involved with his father in forgery of document.

¶9

The submission of learned senior counsel for the applicant is that only allegation against the applicant is that he received amount of alleged compensation from his father and transferred some amount in the account of family members of employees of revenue department. He has further argued that there is no evidence against the applicant of commission of forgery in collusion with revenue authorities. It is lastly argued that the

¶10

case of the applicant is distinguishable from that of co-accused, Hari krishna who has colluded with the employees of revenue department. There is no early prospect of conclusion of trial. So, the applicant, who is in jail since 28.09.2019, having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case as there is no evidence prima facie to establish involvement of forgery of documents by the applicant, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. However, case of the applicant is distinguishable from that of co-accused, Hari Krishna who has received compensation by committing forgery .

¶13

Let applicant-Diwakar Kasaudhan be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that:-

¶14

1.The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; 2.The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; 3.The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicant.

¶15

Order Date :- 17.2.2020

¶16

MN/-

Diwakar Kasaudhan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Diwakar Kasaudhan 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

Rishabh Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sajid Alias Mohd. Sajid Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Gulam Navi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajkumar Vs State of U.P.

Khajan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Saroj Devi Vs State of U.P.