Allowed

Amit Pratap Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Dec 2021BAIL/17519/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the bail application of Amit Pratap Singh, alleging false implication in a cheating case. Considering lack of criminal history and jail overcrowding due to COVID-19, the applicant is released on a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions.

Amit Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17519 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Amit Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi,Amit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sudarshan Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Amit Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No.1176 of 2018 at Police Station-Izzatnagar, District-Bareilly on 13.12.2018 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 504, 506 IPC.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Bareilly on 24.02.2021.

¶8

The applicant is in jail since 20.02.2021, pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶9

Shri Amit Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been

¶10

falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant is a class IV employee in private institution and is not in a position to assure any employment to anyone. The allegation in the FIR is a fallout of civil money dispute between the parties. The informant has also taken proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act against the applicant. Reliance is placed on the law laid down in the case of Gopa Chakravarthy Vs. State of U.P. reported at 2012 (76) ACC 83 . It is contended that even if the prosecution case is taken on its face value, the informant is virtually a conspirator in the commitment of an illegal act. The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case. Lastly it is submitted by the learned counsel for applicant that the applicant shall not abscond, and will fully cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.

¶11

Sri Vikas Sahai, learned A.G.A could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. He, however, could not dispute the fact that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

¶12

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of

¶13

jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India) . These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.

¶14

I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and holds that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶15

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

¶16

Let the applicant-Amit Pratap Singh involved in Case Crime No.1176 of 2018 (Case No. 6055 of 2019) at Police Station-Ijjat Nagar, DistrictBareilly under Sections 420, 467, 471, 406, 504, 506 IPCbe released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶17

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶18

The applicant will not influence the prosecution witness.

¶19

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶20

The applicant 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶22

Order Date :- 6.12.2021 Nadeem

Amit Pratap Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Pratap Singh 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

Irfan Vs State of Up

Banti Sahu @ Shivendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Mujammil Vs State of U.P.

Jabbar Vs State of U.P.

Manvendra Patel @ Ranu Patel Vs State of U.P.