Allowed

Bhagauti Prasad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC17 Nov 2022/12339/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to Bhagauti Prasad in a case involving cheating, forgery, and criminal breach of trust. The court considered the applicant's age, repayment of the involved amount, and lack of prior record as grounds for release on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to appear on fixed dates and not tamper with evidence.

Bhagauti Prasad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 27

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12339 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Bhagauti Prasad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Asif Akhtar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sudhir Upadhyaya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

Instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 350 of 2021, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station- Sarojini Nagar, District Lucknow.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on the basis of suspicion more than 19 persons were named in the first information report and they were sent to jail. He next added that the present applicant is 65 years old and he is suffering for his no fault. He next added that amount of Rs. 30,000/- credited in the account of the applicant, later on the said fact came into knowledge of the applicant, he returned back the same through cheque on 14th July, 2022. He submits that there is no criminal intent or motive prima face on record and the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He also added that there is no previous criminal antecedent of the applicant, which has been mentioned in para 20 of the bail application. The applicant is a law abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 20.02.2022. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶8

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the contention aforesaid and submits that the present applicant was involved in committing the aforesaid offence with other co-accused persons and the public exchequer has been misappropriated and cheated by the applicant as such he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶9

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it is evident that the present applicant is old age person; there is no previous criminal history of the applicant; further amount of Rs.30,000/- has been repaid back through cheque and he is languishing in jail since 20.02.2022.

¶10

Thus, 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 without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant- Bhagauti Prasad 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:-

¶12

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

¶13

(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;

¶14

(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

¶15

(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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 17.11.2022 A.Kr*

¶19

Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR Date: 2022.11.18 10:08:56 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Bhagauti Prasad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagauti Prasad 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

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

Surendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Majeed Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Shani Chaubey @ Alok Kumar Chaubey Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow and Ors.

Raj Kishor @ Tobhu Lal Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home and 3 Others

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