Allowed

Pushpraj Singh @ Sonu Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Sept 2021BAIL/20402/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court condoned delay in a modification application and granted bail to the applicant charged with cheating and forgery. It held that the dispute is primarily civil and noted jail overcrowding during the pandemic as a factor favoring bail.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed; applicant to be released on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount subject to specified conditions regarding witness interference and court appearance.

Pushpraj Singh @ Sonu Singh Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20402 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Pushpraj Singh @ Sonu Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shilpa Ahuja,Nand Kishor Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ranjan Krishna Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Ref: Criminal Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. Nill of 2021

¶6

¶7

Ref: Criminal Misc. Modification Application No. NILL of 2021

¶8

This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the modification application.

¶9

Heard.

¶10

Cause shown for the delay in filing the modification application as asserted in application for condonation of delay is sufficient. Delay in filing the modification application is hereby condoned. This application, accordingly, stands, disposed of.

¶11

Ref: Criminal Misc. Modification Application No. NILL of 2021

¶12

Shri Nand Kishor Mishra, learned counsel assisted by Ms. Shilpa Ahuja, learned counsel for the applicant submits that on earlier occasion correct facts could not be placed by Ms. Shilpa Ahuja, learned counsel for the applicant before this Court. The learned counsel for the applicant gave an

¶13

undertaking on behalf of the applicant to repay the entire loan amount due to the bank for purchase of the disputed vehicles under misconception of facts due to lack of proper instructions.

¶14

Shri Nand Kishor Mishra, learned counsel assisted by Ms. Shilpa Ahuja, learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the dispute is of a civil nature. The liability to repay the loan amount of the applicant is coextensive with that of the informant of the F.I.R. The award has been passed by the Arbitrator determining liabilities of the parties to the bank. The vehicle is not in the possession of the applicant.

¶15

Cause shown in the modification application is sufficient. Condition imposed in the order dated 20.05.2021 on an undertaking given by Ms. Shilpa Ahuja, learned counsel for the applicant is recalled. The modification application is disposed of. The bail application shall be decided on its merits.

¶16

Ref: Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 20402 of 2021

¶17

A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No. 350 of 2015 at Police Station- Kharela, District- Mahoba on 06.12.2015 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C.

¶18

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahoba on 04.05.2021.

¶19

The applicant is in jail since 24.04.2021 pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶20

Shri Nand Kishor Mishra, learned counsel assisted by Ms.

¶21

Shilpa Ahuja, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the dispute is primarily of a civil nature. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has explained his criminal history. 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.

¶22

Learned A.G.A as well as Shri Ranjan Krishna Pandey, learned counsel for the informant could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶23

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.

¶24

I see merit in the submissions of Shri Nand Kishor Mishra, learned counsel assisted by Ms. Shilpa Ahuja, learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶25

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

¶26

Let the applicant Pushpraj Singh @ Sonu Singh involved in Case Crime No. 350 of 2015, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., Police Station- Kharela, DistrictMahoba, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond

¶27

and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶28

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

¶29

The applicant will not influence/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶30

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

¶31

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 or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

Order Date :- 7.9.2021 Dhananjai

¶35

Digitally signed by Justice Ajay Bhanot Date: 2021.09.08 18:18:53 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pushpraj Singh @ Sonu Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pushpraj Singh @ Sonu 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jag Narayan Vs Collector and 2 Others

C/M Sri Sadguru Purb Madhyamik Vidyalaya and Another Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Surmila Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Morkali Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Akhilesh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Mohd. Farooq Vs State of U P and 2 Others