Allowed

Suraj Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Jan 2021BAIL/46511/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Crl. Misc. Bail Ap. No. 46511 of 2020, Single Judge of Allahabad High Court allowed bail to the applicant, Suraj Singh, involved in an IPC cheating case, conditioning release on furnishing bond to the informant and agreeing to pay the balance cheated amount.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing personal bond and two local sureties, subject to undertaking for payment of balance amount and non-tampering with witnesses.

Suraj Singh Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46511 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Suraj Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anubhav Shukla,Ram Shiromani Shukla

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajnikant Rai

¶5

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.821 of 2019, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to F.I.R. version for employment in the co-operative department on the post of ICDP took Rs.7,50,000/-. He further submits that a demand draft No.138602 of Rs.3,75,000/- has been prepared of State Bank of India dated 15.01.2021 in the name of informant which has been handed over today to the informant's counsel Sri Rajnikant Rai. It is also submitted that after enlargement on bail the applicant will pay the remaining amount within a period of three months. 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 the applicant is languishing in jail since 12.10.2020.

¶9

Per contra, learned counsel for the informant submits that he has received the demand draft for Rs.3,75,000/- from the learned counsel for the applicant and on undertaking to repay the remaining amount he may be enlarged.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the amount paid by the applicant to the informant and readiness to pay the remaining amount, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Suraj Singh involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local

¶11

sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶12

(i) Applicant shall furnish an undertaking that after enlargement on bail he will return the remaining amount within a period of three months.

¶13

(ii) 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.

¶14

(iii) 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.

¶15

(iv) 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.

¶16

(v) 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.

¶17

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 21.1.2021 Jitendra

Suraj Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj 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

Mawab Gujjar Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Wadhawa @ Sanjay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Brijesh Goshwami Vs State of U.P.

Vijendra Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Vipin @ Sudesh Vs State of U.P.

Amit Singh Vs State of U.P.