Allowed

Chanchal Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 May 2021BAIL/17948/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad allowed a criminal bail application filed by Chanchal Kumar, noting the merits of counsel's submissions regarding a money dispute and jail overcrowding during the pandemic, and fixed bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below.

Chanchal Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17948 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Chanchal Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Narendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State through video conferencing mode.

¶6

A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No.47 of 2020 at Police Station- Fatehgarh Kotwali, District- Farrukhabad on 31.01.2020 under Section 406, 420, 467, 468, 504, 506 IPC.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad on 24.02.2021.

¶8

The applicant is in jail since 11.01.2021 pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶9

Sri Narendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel contends that the FIR between the parties is the result of a money dispute between the parties. The FIR has been lodged to leverage the criminal proceedings in the claim made by the applicant against the informant demanding return of the money given to him. The applicant had lent the sum to the complainant by issuing cheques of various amounts. The applicant does not have criminal history apart from this case. Lastly it is submitted by Sri Narendra Kumar Singh, 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.

¶10

Learned A.G.A could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶11

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of 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.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

Let the applicant- Chanchal Kumar be released on bail in Case Crime No.47 of 2020 at Police Station- Kotwali Fatehgarh, District- Farrukhabad under Section 406, 420, 467, 468, 504, 506 IPC, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either through his counsel or personally as and when directed by the learned trial court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of

¶17

liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial, the trial in order to secure his presence may issue a proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. In case the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

(vi) 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.

¶22

Order Date :- 21.5.2021 Nadeem Ahmad

¶23

Digitally signed by Justice Ajay Bhanot Date: 2021.05.23 15:55:06 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chanchal Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chanchal 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harshit Gautam Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Chauhan @ Vikku Vs State of U.P.

Gunga @ Mustkeem Vs State of U.P.

Dheeraj Vs State of Up

Gokul Vs State of U.P.

Sajid and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.