Allowed

Durgawati Devi and Anothers v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Jan 2020BAIL/45588/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to applicants accused of securing housing scheme benefits via forged documents, dismissing the need for custodial interrogation as moneys had been refunded. Bail granted subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each, subject to six specific conditions including cooperation in investigation.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45588 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Durgawati Devi And Anothers Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Prakash Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.

¶5

Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vikas Sahai, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in light of the apprehension of the arrest of the applicant in Case Crime No. 42 of 2019, under Sections 467, 468, 471, 419, 420, 406, 119, 120, 120B, 192, 193, 196, 198 and 200 I.P.C., Police Station Haliya, District Mirzapur.

¶8

On 31 October 2019, the Court while entertaining the instant application had accorded interim protection to the applicants here. The allegations levelled against them is that although they were ineligible for the grant of benefits under the Pradhan Mantri Avas Yojana, they were able to obtain the same on the basis of forged and fabricated documents. The Court takes note of the submission that the list of eligible candidates is drawn by the concerned Gram Sabha after due verification and scrutiny of documents at more than one level. Although the FIR alleges that the applicants availed of these benefits on the basis of forged documents, in the counter affidavit which has been filed by the learned AGA, no details in respect of these allegations have been set forth. The counter affidavit

¶9

also admits to the position that the moneys which were incorrectly transferred to the accounts of the applicants have since been refunded and returned. Since the entire record is present with the State respondents, the Court finds no ground in justification of the custodial interrogation of the applicants here.

¶10

Accordingly and till the submission of a police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. the applicants Durgawati Devi and Nakshatra Devi involved in the aforesaid case crime number are held entitled to anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the concerned police station subject to the following conditions:-

¶11

(i) the applicants will join and participate in each and every aspect of "Investigation" and will lend full assistance to the Investigating Agency even with regard to "discovery of fact" if and when required so by the Investigating Agency or the concerned Court;

¶12

(ii) the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶13

iii) the applicants shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office;

¶14

(iv) the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have a passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶15

In case of default or breach of any of the aforementioned conditions it shall be open to the Investigating Officer to file an appropriate application before this Court for cancellation of the interim anticipatory bail granted.

¶16

The application shall stand finally disposed of.

¶17

Order Date :- 2.1.2020 LA/-

Durgawati Devi and Anothers v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Durgawati Devi and Anothers 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

Asif Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Nempal and Another Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Harijan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Hakimuddin @ Patley Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ballu@ Basru Vs State of U.P. Anothers

Harsh (Minor) Vs State of U.P.