In a bail application under Sections 420, 406, 506 IPC, the High Court released the accused on personal bond with conditions. The court referred apex court dictum regarding Article 21.
Release of the applicant on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specified conditions.
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. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6412 of 2020
Applicant :- Sovind Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajrshi Gupta,Vinayak Mithal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,N.I.Jafri,Sadaful Islam Jafri
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
List of additional cause list has been revised.
Heard Sri Vinayak Mithal, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Sovind Kumar, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 234 of 2019, under Sections 420, 406, 506 IPC, Police Station Kavi Nagar, DistrictGhaziabad, during pendency of trial.
Allegations in the FIR are regarding advancement of loan of Rs.1,50,00,000/- to the applicant by the informant, which was not returned. It is further alleged that there were commercial relationship between the parties and earlier also money was advanced to the applicant by the informant on the loan and he repaid the same to the informant.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that Investigating Officer has only been able to collect the material regarding advancement of loan of Rs.1,14,00,000/- through bank account to the applicant. Therefore, allegations in the FIR are not correct. Even otherwise there was commercial relationship between the parties and without resort to the remedy available before the civil court, dispute cannot be settled. There are numbers of facts, which have to be decided before deciding the exact amount paid by the informant to the applicant. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no criminal history to his credit and was in jail since 21.10.2019.
The applicant has been enlarged on parole by the jail authorities in pursuance of the order of the Apex Curt and the committee constituted for the aforesaid purpose at present on account of spread of novel Corona virus in jails.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant.
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 two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 10.9.2020 Ruchi Agrahari
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant should be released on bail in a cheating case involving commercial dispute elements.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶11
(2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sovind Kumar
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Siddharth
Parties & counsel
