Criminal judge allowed bail to an applicant accused of crimes involving cheating and forgery, citing parity with co-accused and lack of criminal history, subject to standard conditions.
Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding trial appearance and non-interference with witnesses.
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. - 27
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12856 of 2022
Applicant :- Atiullah Ansari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Desh Ratan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh-I, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
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.223 of 2022, under Section 406, 506, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Machrehta, District Sitapur.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is the driver of the co-accused, namely, Pradumnath Dubey and he has no role in whatsoever the allegation has been mentioned in the F.I.R. Amount of Rs.1,05,000/-, which is alleged to have been duped, was credited in the account of Meena Devi. There is no other corroborative evidence against the applicant so as to connect him in the instant matter. The applicant has no criminal history, which he has explained in para 14 of the bail application. Identically situated co-accused, Gangeshwar Pandey and Pradumnath Dubey have already been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12561 of 2022 and 11568 of 2022, vide orders dated 3.11.2022 and 12.10.2022 respectively. The applicant is seeking parity of the orders aforesaid. The applicant is a law abiding citizen, who is languishing in jail since 5.8.2022. In case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and will co-operate in the trial proceedings.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail but could not dispute the fact that identically situated coaccused Gangeshwar Pandey and Pradumanth Dubey have already been enlarged on bail by this Court and there is no criminal history of the applicant, which has been explained in para 14 of the bail application.
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.
Let the applicant Atiullah Ansari nvolved 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:-
(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;
(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;
(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
(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.
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.
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.
Order Date :- 22.11.2022 Ram Murti
Digitally signed by RAM MURTI YADAV Date: 2022.11.23 09:47:00 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether large bail should be granted to the applicant amidst allegations of false implication.
Atiullah Ansari
State Of U.P.
Shree Prakash Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
