Allowed

Pramod Kumar Srivastava v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Oct 2021BAIL/17828/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed the bail application in a cheating case under IPC Sections 419 and 420. The court held it to be a bail case based on the nature of accusation, severity of punishment, and public interest, directing release on personal and surety bonds.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on a personal bond and two sureties each in like amount with verification of surety details.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17828 of 2021 Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Srivastava Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Dwivedi,Bhaskar Bhadra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Bhaskar Bhadra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶4

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.57 of 2021, under Sections 419 & 420 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Bareilly during the pendency of trial.

¶5

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. As per F.I.R., which has been lodged against unknown persons to the effect that from Mobile No.941253411 a call has been received by the Public Relation Officer of S.P. office by the name of representative of Deputy Chief Minister for lodging criminal case against Asharfilal, the informant of Case Crime No.200 of 2020. It is further contended that the applicant has been implicated in this case just on the statement of Chandan Singh (accused of Case Crime No.200 of 2020), who has stated that the applicant met with him and took Rs.20,000/- to get the case registered against Asharfi Lal. It is next contended that there is no link between the statement of Chandan Singh recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and the present case. It is also contended that no voice was recorded in order to trace out the call in surveillance and even the statement of the Superintendent of Police had not been recorded by the Investigating Officer. The offence is triable by Magistrate and charge sheet has already been filed on 04.09.2021, no investigation is pending. Lastly it is contended that the applicant is in jail since 23.02.2021 having criminal history of one case in which he is on bail and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶6

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶7

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.

¶8

Let the applicant, Pramod Kumar Srivastava involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the

¶9

like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶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 :- 4.10.2021

¶20

S.P.

Pramod Kumar Srivastava v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Kumar Srivastava 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nafees Vs State of U.P.

Pintoo Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P.

Chhatrapal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Kumar @ Adarsh Vs State of U.P.

Gulam Navi Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Kumar Vs State of U.P.