Allowed

Suresh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC30 Sept 2022/11342/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted bail to applicant in charges of cheating and forgery. Applicant allowed on personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions regarding witness interference and court appearances. Court clarified decision does not reflect on merits of case.

What did the court decide?

Order directed to release applicant on bail subject to furnishing personal bond and two sureties and meeting specified conditions.

Suresh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11342 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Suresh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Dheerendra Kr. Agnihotri,Vishnu Kant Awasthi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.67 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S.- Bakshi Ka Talab, District - Lucknow.

¶7

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further added that the present applicant is neither vendor nor vendee nor the beneficiary of the aforesaid sale-deed. He added that present applicant is only a marginal witness and the bail of the coaccused, namely, Raj Kumari, who is the purchaser of the land in question has already been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.11131 of 2022 on 27.09.2022. He submits that the applicant is seeking parity of the order aforesaid. He further added that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail 08.08.2022. In case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶8

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has opposed the contention aforesaid but could not dispute the fact that identically situated co-accused has already been enlarged on bail.

¶9

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶10

Let the applicant Suresh involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶11

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶12

(2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He 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;

¶13

(3) 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.; and

¶14

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶16

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶17

Order Date :- 30.9.2022 KR

¶18

Digitally signed by RABINDRA KUMAR Date: 2022.10.01 16:38:05 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Suresh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bharat Chawla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohd. Azam Ali (as Per Fir Azam Siddiqui) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Dinesh Srivasatava Vs State of Up Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Munna @ Imran Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Rahul Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Shree Prakash Diwedi @ Prakash Diwedi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.