Allowed

Ramesh Chand v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Mar 2021BAIL/5895/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Allahabad granted bail to Ramesh Chand, an applicant accused of cheating and forgery. The court relied on the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution, without expressing a final opinion on the merits of the underlying criminal charges.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Ramesh Chand was enlarged on bail by executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court.

Ramesh Chand Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5895 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Ramesh Chand Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Kumar Singh,Mohit Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is wholly innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is next submitted that earlier an F.I.R. has been lodged from the applicant side and in that F.I.R., applicant alongwith co-accused Gaurav Kumar and Farukh Azam are the victims. Investigation was concluded on the ground of forged signature on agreement in which charge sheet was submitted against named accused Sohanbiri and Lokendra Verma under section 406 IPC. Thereafter, an application was filed for further investigation and after investigation, again charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant and other co-accused (victim in the said F.I.R.) on the ground that the signatures of co-accused Sohanbiri and Lokendra Verma were found forged on agreement. It is further submitted that named accused in F.I.R. have shown certain bill vouchers for explaining the receiving of Rs. 56 Lakh which is one and a half year old and for the first time produced before the police officials. Applicant alongwith co-accused have paid Rs. 56 Lakh through online transaction and not only this, for the very same plot, Sohanbiri, Lokendra Verma, Rajat Verma and others have taken Rs. 1 Crore and 16 Lakh from one Shankar Kumar Mittal who had also filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. which was treated as complaint case by the Magistrate and order dated 15.10.2020 was passed for recording statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C. Criminal history of certain cases of the applicant is explained. It is next contended that there are no chances of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. It is next contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 22.10.2020 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶8

Considering the material on record as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, let the applicant- Ramesh Chand , involved in Case Crime No. 807 of 2019, under Sections- 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police StationSahibabad, District -Ghaziabad, be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶9

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

¶10

This bail order would be subject to the fulfillment of following conditions:-

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶12

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶13

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶14

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

In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall

¶17

be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

In case the applicant has been enlarged on short term bail as per the order of committee constituted under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court his bail shall be effective after the period of short term bail comes to an end.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶20

Order Date :- 19.3.2021 Sartaj

¶21

Digitally signed by Justice Neeraj Tiwari Date: 2021.03.19 16:48:17 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramesh Chand v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Chand 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kusuma Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rambabu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Himalay Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Gyan Dass and Others Vs State

Tufail Ahmed Khan Vs State of U.P.

Vinod Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.