Allowed

Chandra Mohan v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow

Allahabad HC14 Jul 2022/475/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a bail application where the High Court granted bail to the applicant, Chandra Mohan, lodged in a cheating case under IPC Sections 419 and 420. The court allowed bail without expressing an opinion on merit, imposing standard conditions to prevent misuse of liberty.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount subject to strict conditions of attendance and prohibition on unnecessary adjournments.

Chandra Mohan Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin.Secy… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 475 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Chandra Mohan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Nivas Rathore,Ankit Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shashi Bhushan Shukla,Shashi Bhusan Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

There is illness slip on behalf of the counsel for the first informant and this has been the case on previous occasion also, i.e., on 11.03.2022 and after that the case has been listed thrice.

¶6

Heard Sri Ankit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 26 of 2019 U/S 419, 420 IPC, Police Station Bilgram, District Hardoi, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the co-accused person stated to have got a sale deed executed in favour of Naresh Chandra by impersonating the first informant.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. He further submitted that the applicant is only marginal witness, and as such, he is not a beneficiary of the said deed. He also submitted that he is not a resident of the place of occurrence. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 01.12.2021. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but he could not dispute the fact that there is no criminal history of the applicant.

¶11

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant- Chandra Mohan, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties

¶13

each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶14

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶15

(ii) 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 IPC.

¶16

(iii) 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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

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

¶19

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶20

Order Date :- 14.7.2022 Anurag, APS

¶21

Digitally signed by ANURAG SINGH Date: 2022.07.19 15:21:04 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Chandra Mohan v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Mohan v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pramod Kumar Dubey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Chotelal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secrty. Home and Another

Vinod Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Khursheed @ Vakeel Vs State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Home Lko.

Bhrigu Nath Verma (B.N. Verma) Vs State of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Khuddan @ Subhash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Seyc. Home Lko.