Partly allowed

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

Allahabad HC5 Aug 2020BAIL/4292/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal case regarding false implication for cheating and forgery. Bail was allowed subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties upon restoration of court functioning, with specific conditions to prevent tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties upon restoration of court functioning, subject to specific conditions.

Krishnakant Raghav @ K.K.Raghav @ Kedar Raghav Vs State of… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4292 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Krishnakant Raghav @ K.K.Raghav @ Kedar Raghav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Srivastava,Rahul Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Krishnakant Raghav @ K.K.Raghav @ Kedar Raghav with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 1113 of 2019, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 384 IPC, Police Station Vrindavan, DistrictMathura, during pendency of trial.

¶8

Allegation against the applicant is that he was involved in extracting money from public claiming himself to be CBI Officer. He has been arrested on the information of the informer by the police. Information was given by the informer at 07:37 p.m. and the applicant was arrested in the morning of next day at 08:20 a.m. It is submitted that the informant informed the police about his presence on the scene of occurrence at 07:37 p.m. It is not believable that he was present on the same place in the morning of next day. It is a case of false implication. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit and is in jail since 19.12.2019.

¶9

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

¶10

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

¶11

two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 5.8.2020 Ruchi Agrahari

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishnakant Raghav @ K.K.Raghav @ Kedar Raghav 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.

Irfanuddin Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Kumar Saxena Vs State of U.P.