Allowed

Prateek Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Aug 2021BAIL/10704/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Court No. 71 granted bail to Prateek Kumar in a cheating case involving Sections 420 and 406 IPC. The court observed a delay in FIR registration and noted the applicant was languishing in jail since the incident. Bail was granted on personal bond and two sureties without expressing an opinion on the merit of the case.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to attendance, non-tampering with witnesses, and refraining from illegal activities.

Prateek Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10704 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Prateek Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anuj Bajpai,Sushil Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The F.I.R. has been lodged about more than nine months belated from the date of incident which has not been explained by the prosecution. The present F.I.R. has been lodged only for the purpose of harassing of applicant. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. There is no criminal history of applicant. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 03.12.2020.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶8

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶9

Let applicant- Prateek Kumar, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 527/2020, under Sections- 420, 406 I.P.C., P.S. Sadar Bazar, District- Shahjahanpur on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶10

The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶11

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶12

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶13

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶14

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶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

Order Date :- 5.8.2021 Sharad/-

Prateek Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prateek Kumar 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

Riyasat Vs State of U.P.

Azad Vs State of U.P.

Akhtar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sarik @ Mushir Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Laek Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Charan Yadav Vs State of U.P. and another