Single judge granted bail to the applicant in a cheating and money laundering case, citing parity with a co-accused granted bail by a coordinate bench, subject to standard conditions.
Release on bail with personal bond and two local sureties subject to undertaking of non-interference and attendance conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 70
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44183 of 2020
Applicant :- Ajay Prakash Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nilay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.
Sri Nilay Kumar Pandey, Advocate has filed supplementary affidavit on behalf of the applicant, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 342 of 2020, under Sections 420, 406, 419, 467, 468, 201, 471, 120B, 34 IPC, Police Station Cantt., District Varanasi.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the FIR Avesham Company and Kasita Company were formed by the co-accused and it is alleged that company offering the customers for invest of money which will be doubled in five years. He submits that applicant is not named in the FIR, during investigation he has been found to be MD of the Kasita Company. He submits that Rajendra Prasad was MD of the compnay who has been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 2.11.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 27504 of 2020, therefore, the applicant is entitled for bail on the ground of parity. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that there is no criminal history of the applicant and he is languishing in jail since 11.04.2020.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact that coaccused has already been released on bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material on record, enlargement of co-accused Rajendra Prasad on bail, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the
applicant- Ajay Prakash involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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.
(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.
(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 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.
(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.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such 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. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 19.1.2021 Israr
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail on grounds of parity with a co-accused who has already been granted bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 27504 of 2020Referred¶8
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Ajay Prakash
Ali Zamin
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Ali Zamin
Parties & counsel
