Allowed

Kamlesh @ Nathai v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Feb 2021BAIL/4573/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application, the court considered the applicant's claims of false implication and lack of public witness for alleged recovery. Relying on Data Ram, the court allowed bail subject to conditions including cooperation in trial and non-tampering with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of attending trial and not tampering with witnesses.

Kamlesh @ Nathai Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4573 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Kamlesh @ Nathai Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sharad Saran Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Exemption application is allowed.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 447 of 2020, under Sections 413, 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., P.S Pashchim, district-Kaushambi, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶8

The first information report was lodged by the Sub-Inspector Chandan Singh against the present accused and the other co-accused Sandeep Tiwari regarding theft and changing factious number plates.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He was arrested by the police on the information of the 'Mukhbir Khas' and from his possession three stolen motorcycles were allegedly shown recovered. Further submission is that the alleged recovery which has been shown from the applicant's possession is totally fake and false and there is no public witness of the alleged recovery. He lastly submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 6.12.2020 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶10

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A.

¶11

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, considering the law laid down in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018(3) SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the

¶12

applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.

¶13

Let the applicant, Kamlesh @ Nathai involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶14

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

¶15

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶16

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

¶17

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶19

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by learned counsel for the applicant along with a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶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 :- 4.2.2021 Faridul

Kamlesh @ Nathai v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamlesh @ Nathai 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

Haseen Vs State of U.P.

Punna Vs State of U.P.

Mohammed Yaseen Vs State of U.P and Another

Sri Kant Bajpai Vs State

Kisan Singh @ Krishna Vs State of U.P.

Maheshwari Vs State of U.P.