Sahil Kazmi v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
Court allowed bail to the applicant in a cheating case, noting jail overcrowding and unexplained delay in FIR lodgement, and imposed standard bond conditions.
What did the court decide?
Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties.
What the court decided
Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18155 of 2021
Applicant :- Sahil Kazmi Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Pandey,Dileep Kumar Pandey,M J Akhtar,Nandini Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vinay Kumar Singh Chandel
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Heard Shri V. M. Zaidi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri M. J. Akhtar, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Sanjeev Kumar Asthana, learned counsel holding of Vinay Kumar Singh Chandel, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No. 164 of 2021 at Police Station-Sihani Gate, District-Ghaziabad under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C.
The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad on 08.03.2021.
The applicant is in jail since 09.02.2021, pursuant to the said F.I.R.
Shri V. M. Zaidi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri M. J. Akhtar, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The unexplained delay of five years in lodgement of F.I.R. shows that the same has been lodged as an afterthought to implicate the applicant. This is essentially an employer employee dispute since
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant in light of the false implication allegations and jail overcrowding conditions?
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Sahil Kazmi
- respondent
State of U.P.
Coram
Ajay Bhanot
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · December
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/18155/2021
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court