Allowed

Ram Teerath v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Jul 2022/11961/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, an accountant, in a case involving cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy under IPC sections 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120B. Conditions for bail included cooperation with investigation and refraining from leaving India.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties.

Ram Teerath Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11961 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Teerath Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Pratap Singh Vatsa Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ajay Pratap Singh Vatsa, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arvind Kumar Tripathi, learned Additional Government Advocate-I for the State and perused the records.

¶6

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime/F.I.R. No.0108 of 2021, registered under Sections 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC at Police Station- Bheeti, District Ambedkar Nagar with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is an Accountant in the Department and has nothing to do with the said feeding of data pertaining to the consumers. His role is to disburse the amount on the basis of already feeded data executed by the computer operator at the directions of the Panchayat Secretary. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the applicant has co-operated in the investigation and undertakes that he will cooperate in the investigation in future also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

¶8

Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that the applicant is hand in glove with the co-accused persons but could not dispute the fact that the applicant has nothing to do with the feeding of data in the records.

¶9

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant deserves to be granted anticipatory bail in connection with the aforesaid case.

¶10

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is disposed of with following directions:-

¶11

(A) In the event of arrest of the applicant- Ram Teerath involved in aforesaid case shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173(2)

¶12

Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on his/her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned;

¶13

(B) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;

¶14

(C) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and

¶15

(D) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

¶16

In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶17

Order Date :- 7.7.2022 Ravi Kant

¶18

Digitally signed by RAVI KANT Date: 2022.07.07 18:07:46 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Teerath v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Teerath 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yogendra Narayan Dubey Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home

Jagdish Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ravindra Kishore Vs State of U.P.Thru. Special Investigation Team (S.I.T.) Lko.

Nakul Yadav @ Girija Shankar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Danish Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Yogendra Loniya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.