Allowed

Hardwari Lal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Nov 2021BAIL/30840/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge judgment allowed a bail application filed by Hardwari Lal charged under Sections 406, 420 IPC. The court found merit in the counsel's submissions regarding false implication and released the applicant on bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant allowed to be released on bail under Sections 406, 420, and 34 IPC on personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30840 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Hardwari Lal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Gupta,Chandra Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nafees Ahmad learned AGA for the State.

¶6

A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No. 0033 of 2021 at Police Station-Didoli District Jyotiba Pule Nagar on 25.01.2021 under Section406, 420 IPC.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Sessions Judge,Amroha on 08.04.2021.

¶8

The applicant is in jail since 28.05.2020, pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶9

Sri Pankaj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The

¶10

applicant is only an agent in the company being run under the name and style of Amplify Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. The applicant does not have any role in the development of business model or its viability. He does not have any say in the business practices adopted by the company. He is lowly employee who works at a meagre salary. The applicant has not benefitted from any fraudulent transaction. Explaining the criminal history, learned counsel for the applicant contends that a number of cases of the same generic offence pertaining to the same company have been registered against the applicant. Lastly it is submitted by Sri Pankaj Kumar Gupta, 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.

¶11

Sri Nafees Ahmad, learned A.G.A could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶12

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation ( Ref.:

¶13

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.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

Let the applicant- Hardwari Lal be released on bail in Case Crime No. 33 of 2020 at Police Station-Didauli District J.P. Nagar under Section 406, 420, and 34 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:-

¶17

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶18

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶19

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

¶20

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 24.11.2021 Nadeem

Hardwari Lal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hardwari Lal 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suhail Vs State of U.P.

Munesh Vs State of U.P.

Shivnath Vs State of U.P. and Another

Triveni Lal Vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Prasad Vs State of U.P.

Mehraj Vs State of U.P.