Allowed

Mithilesh Kumar Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Dec 2021BAIL/37402/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application filed by Mithilesh Kumar Singh under IPC and IT Act. Court granted bail considering co-accused released, lack of FIR against applicant, and no criminal antecedents, imposing strict conditions to prevent misuse and absence.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties on strict conditions regarding court attendance and prosecution cooperation.

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

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37402 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Mithilesh Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shailesh Kumar Yadav,Ram Jatan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶6

It is urged by learned counsel for the applicant that co-accused Deepak Yadav has been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.11.2021. An F.I.R. came to be lodged against unknown persons for having fraudulently withdrawn of money from the bank account of the complainant; applicant is not named in the F.I.R. On arrest, Rs. 460/-, one pair of puma shoes and one music system was recovered from the possession of the applicant. It is urged that the applicant has been made accused on the confessional statement. It is lastly submitted that the applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent and he is languishing in jail since 30.04.2021, there is no likelihood of early disposal of trial and the applicant undertakes that if enlarged on bail, he will never misuse his liberty and will co-operate in the trial.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶9

Let the applicant, Mithilesh Kumar Singh , involved in Case Crime No. 21 of 2021, under Sections 406, 411, 419, 420 I.P.C. and Section 66D Information Technology Act, Police Station-Cyber Crime, District Varanasi, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶11

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is

¶13

issued and 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.

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 20.12.2021 K.K. Maurya

Mithilesh Kumar Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithilesh Kumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Manish Engineering Enterprises Thru Prop. Vs Indian Farmers Fertilizer Coop. Ltd. Thru M.D. and Ors.

Santosh Srivastava Vs State of U.P.

Mamta Katheria Vs State of U.P.

Kuldeep Kumar Vs Union of India

Guljar Vs State of U.P.

Monu@ Saurabh Kushwaha and Another Vs State of U.P.