The Court granted bail to the accused applicant in a cheating and forgery case pending trial. The Court noted that a related civil suit regarding the disputed property case is pending and observed that bail is a fit case without commenting on the merits.
Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40473 of 2020
Applicant :- Veena Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vishnu Dutt Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Subhash Chand,J.
Sri Aditya Kant Sharma, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party/informant.
Heard learned counsel for applicant(s), learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
This bail application has been preferred by the accusedapplicant(s), Veena Yadav, who is involved in Case Crime No. 620 of 2018, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. P.S.- Shahganj, District- Agra.
The prosecution case in brief is that the informant Ashif Qureshi along with his brother Mohd. Kasim had purchased properties situated at Sorokatra, Shahganj, District Agra, through two sale-deeds on 17.10.2015 from Vinod Kumar @ Vinod Singh and Sushma Agarwal. Raj Kumar and Suraj Singh Yadav were having forged power of attorney in their favour with regard to whole property on 9.9.2015 and Suraj Singh Yadav without any authority and title executed sale deed of the same in favour of his mother Veena Yadav on 30.11.2015 of which witnesses are Bhupendra Kushwaha and Raj Kumar and with the help of Deenu Yadav and Om Yadav, who are bent upon to take the possession of the same, hence the aforementioned FIR has been lodged.
Learned counsel for the applicant(s) in support of his prayer for bail submits that the applicant(s) is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. Further contention is that the civil suit with regard to the property in dispute is pending and the Suraj Yadav co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 1.5.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4976 of 2020 and the role of the applicant is similar. It is further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.10.2020.
Learned A.G.A. as well as Sri Aditya Kant Sharma, learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for
bail but they have conceded that civil suit with regard to the property in dispute is pending before Civil Court as the matter is of purely civil nature.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and going through the record, without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let applicant(s), Veena Yadav , 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 with the following conditions:
(i) The applicant(s) shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
(ii) The applicant(s) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant(s) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant(s) shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, liberty is given to the trial court to cancel the bail of the applicant(s) without any reference to this Court.
Order Date :- 23.11.2020 Prajapati
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant, Veena Yadav, is eligible for bail in the pending criminal trial.
Whether the pending civil suit regarding the disputed property justifies bail for the accused.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Veena Yadav
Subhash Chand
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
