The single judge granted bail to the applicant, Sumit Kumar, in a criminal case involving offences under Section 420 IPC and Section 66-D of the IT Act, while on remand since September 2020.
Applicant admitted to bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of like amount.
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. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5212 of 2021
Applicant :- Sumit Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Indra Bhahadur Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State
The applicant is seeking bail in connection with case crime no. 390 of 2020, under Section 420 IPC and 66-D of I.T. Act, P.S. Indirapuram, District Ghaziabad.
As per allegations made in the first information report the entire fraud was committed in the name of providing job and fake appointment lists were also prepared by the accused named in the first information report.
It has been pleaded in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicant had earlier been named in connection with case crime no. 1586 of 2020 in which certain recoveries during investigation were made of various mobile phones and in a confessional statement that had been recorded qua issuance of fake appointment letters and since there were appointment letters in respect of Neha and Sneha and on certain interpretation that were co-related with the case crime no. 390 of 2020, the name of the applicant has come to be connected with present case crime no. 390 of 2020. It is further argued that in connection with case crime no. 1586 of 2020 under Section, 420, 467,468,471, 406 IPC and Sections 43A, 66D of IT Act, P.S. Indirapuram, District Ghaziabad, the applicant has been enlarged on bail vide detailed order of this Court dated 2.12.2020 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.43143 of 2020 and, therefore, it is submitted that applicant since has come to be implicated on the basis of same recovery, he is entitled to be released on bail in this case as well. It is also argued that there is no criminal history except that earlier case in respect of which applicant has already been enlarged on bail. The applicant is in jail since 03.09.2020.
Learned AGA has opposed the bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and also the facts that no recovery has been made in connection with present case crime.
In view of overall facts and circumstance of the case and having gone through the bail order of this Court bearing Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 43143 of 2020 and looking into the complicity of the present accused in the present case, the Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be admitted to bail.
Accordingly, applicant namely, Sumit Kumar is admitted to bail in the aforesaid case and he shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned
It is further provided that this bail order available on the official website of the High Court will be taken to be the authentic one and certified copy shall be submitted before the court concerned as soon as it is issued.
It is further directed that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the police/ investigating agency/ trial as the case may be.
In view of the aforesaid, the bail application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 25.1.2021 Sanjeev
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a case involving cheating and obtaining digital signatures/identification certificates.
Sumit Kumar
Ajit Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
