Allowed

Mohd. Chand v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Sept 2021BAIL/20519/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application where the court, considering the applicant's willingness to repay dues, lack of prior record, and pandemic-related jail overcrowding, inducts the petitioner on bail subject to specific conditions including return of the owed amount.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions including repayment of Rs. 4 lacs within two months if not done earlier.

Mohd. Chand Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20519 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd. Chand Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bharti Kashyap Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd Aadil Siddiqui

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Ms. Bharti Kashyap, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mohd. Aadil Siddiqui, learned counsel for the opposite party, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA-I, appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is next contended that from the total amount Rs. Four Lacs has already been paid to the informant by the applicant and the son of the applicant is ready to settle the dispute and also ready to repay the remaining amount/money which falls near about 4 lacs. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 12.02.2021. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶7

Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶8

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.

¶9

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.

¶10

Let applicant- Mohd. Chand , be released on bail in Case Crime No. 632 of 2020, under Sections- 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506, 120-B IPC, Police Station- Mugalpura, District- Moradabad, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶11

The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶12

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶13

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶14

The applicant will return back the due amount of Rs. 4 lakhs to the first informant within a period of 2 months from the date of his enlargement on bail, if the same is not done by the applicant during the above specified period the court below is at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 21.9.2021 Arti

Mohd. Chand v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Chand 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

Roshan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rashid Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Raju Rajbhar Vs State of U.P.

Nigam Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Usman Vs State of U.P.