This court rejected a criminal bail application moved by Manish Kumar Dahiya. The applicant alleged false implication in a fraud case involving a private limited company. The court found no good ground for bail.
Bail application rejected; applicant to remain in custody.
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. - 2
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4561 of 2021
Applicant :- Manish Kumar Dahiya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Bajinder Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Raj Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. through video conferencing.
This bail application has been moved to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 571 of 2020, under Sections 420, 409, 411, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Noida Phase-III, District Gautam Budh Nagar.
As per the prosecution case, the employees of West Land Pvt. Ltd. persuaded the investors to deposit the money for franchisee of the company. It is alleged that the informant deposited Rs. 21 lakh the aforesaid company; subsequently, it was found that company is fraudulent and the complainant has been duped of his money. The money of several other investors was also duped and ultimately the company was closed. It is alleged by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated; the company was incorporated in 2019; the forged documents of the applicant were used for appointing him the Director of the said company.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submits that in the certificate of incorporation applicant has clearly been shown as Director and Authorized Signatory of the company and it is not being disputed by the applicant that the money was deposited by the investors in the account of the company.
It is not in the public interest to enlarge the applicant on bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the submission advanced, I find no good ground for grant of bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.
Order Date :- 17.6.2021 P. Sri.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether there are any good grounds to enlarge the applicant on bail in the said criminal case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Manish Kumar Dahiya
Suneet Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
