In a bail application under Sections 420 and 406 IPC, the court allowed bail to the applicant who was falsely implicated without money transfer allegations, considering the pandemic, lack of criminal history, and the likelihood of trial conclusion.
Applicant released on personal bond and two sureties until normal court functioning is restored.
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. - 7948 of 2020
Applicant :- Sachin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Saran,Rohan Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri Ankit Saran and Sri Rohan Gupta, counsels for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State.
The allegation in the FIR is that the informant got a fake call from Naukri.Com informing that he has been selected in IBM Company and has to deposit money as processing fee. The applicant later came to know that he has been cheated of Rs. 1 lakh by co-accused, Anup Gupta. Other allegations were made against other co-accused persons in the FIR regarding receipt of further amounts. The applicant was neither named in the FIR nor there is any allegation of transfer of any money to him.
Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case along with co-accused and six mobile phones, two smart phones and four laptops were recovered from their possession. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the mobile recovered were not used in the alleged offence. He talked to co-accused and therefore their numbers find place in the call history. It has further been submitted that the applicant is in jail since 19.12.2019 and has no criminal history to his credit. The offences alleged are triable by Magistrate. There is no possibility of earlier conclusion of trial in view of spread of novel corona virus.
Learned A.G.A has opposed the bail application of the applicant but could no dispute the above arguments.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, argument advanced on behalf of the parties, spreading of novel corona virus in jails, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, 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, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Sachin , in Case Crime No. 1058 of 2019, under Sections- 420, 406 IPC, Police Station- Noida Sector 39, District- Gautam Budh Nagar, 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 4.11.2020 Rohit
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail on the grounds of false implication and lack of criminal history.
Whether the current jail conditions and pandemic situation warrant enlargement on bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶9
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sachin
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Siddharth
Parties & counsel
