Allowed

Aditya Kumar Jigyasu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Dec 2020BAIL/46358/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Aditya Kumar Jigyasu, falsely implicated in a forgery and cyber crime case. The court imposed specific conditions regarding attendance, filing of undertakings against adjournment, and consequences of absence to prevent abuse of bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with conditions to file undertaking against adjournment, appear at trial court, and face action under Section 229-A IPC or Section 174-A IPC for absence.

Aditya Kumar Jigyasu Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46358 of 2020 Applicant :- Aditya Kumar Jigyasu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jamil Ahamad Azmi,Sikandar Raza Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Jameel Ahmad Azmi and Sri Sikandar Raza, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶5

A first information report was lodged as Case Crime No. 152 of 2020 at Police Station- Siddhari, District- Azamgarh on 16.09.2020, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and 66C, 66D I.T. Act.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Azamgarh on 08.10.2020.

¶7

The applicant is in jail since 17.09.2020 pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶8

Sri Jameel Ahmad Azmi and Sri Sikandar Raza, learned counsel contend that a sum of Rs. 4900/- was credited in the bank account of the applicant without his knowledge or consent. The principal allegation is against the Bank Manager who was complicit in making forged bank transactions resulting in loss to the account holder. There is no allegation against the applicant. The applicant was not named in the FIR. The applicant has been falsely implicated.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application.

¶10

The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶11

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant- Aditya Kumar Jigyasu be released on bail in

¶13

Case Crime No. 152 of 2020 at Police Station- Siddhari, District- Azamgarh, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and 66C, 66D I.T. Act., registered on 16.09.2020 at Police Station- Siddhari, District- Azamgarh, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶15

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

(v) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order

¶19

downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶20

(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶21

(vii) 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.

¶22

Order Date :- 15.12.2020 Pravin

Aditya Kumar Jigyasu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aditya Kumar Jigyasu 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

Vikas Vs State of U.P.

Satendra Kumar Dohare Vs State of U.P.

Tekchand Vs State of U.P.

Furqan Alam Vs State of U.P.

Smt Guddan and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Hradesh Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.