Allowed

Priyanka Agrawal v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC4 Feb 2022ABAIL/19067/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application challenging arrest for cheating and forgery, the court granted bail with conditions on bonding, court attendance, and non-absconding, noting no criminal history and referencing overcrowding concerns.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC on personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions of court appearance and non-interference.

Priyanka Agrawal Vs State of U.P.and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 19067 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Priyanka Agrawal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Satyendra Chandra Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State through video conferencing mode.

¶6

Shri Satyendra Chandra Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant did not forge his marksheets or educational testimonials. He is fully eligible for appointment. Question of forged marksheets and issue of eligibility of the petitioner and others for appointment is pending before the Supreme Court. Shri Satyendra Chandra Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant contends that in exact similar allegations, coaccused Bhup Singh and 3 others have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court by order dated 08.04.2021 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8484 of 2021. For the reasons contained in that order, the present applicant is also entitled to same protection. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case. Lastly it is contended by the learned counsel for applicant that the

¶7

applicant shall not abscond and will fully cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.

¶8

Shri Ashutosh Pandey, learned brief holder could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶9

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.

¶10

In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the present application pending or calling for counter affidavit at this stage. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail in this case, at this stage.

¶11

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶12

The applicant- Priyanka Agrawal is granted anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 39 of 2020, under Sections -

¶13

420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station - Sungarhi, District - Kasganj, till the conclusion of the trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall attend the court proceedings as and when required;

¶15

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise or to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of anticipatory bail before this Court.

¶18

In case any false facts have been stated on behalf of the applicant or material facts have been suppressed, the State or any concerned party may file an application for recall of this order.

¶19

The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶20

Order Date :- 4.2.2022 Dhananjai

Priyanka Agrawal v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priyanka Agrawal v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vishal Chaudhary Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Pal Singh @ Tenta Vs State of U.P.

Islam Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P.

Manish Sethiya Vs State of U.P.

Ram Dulare Bind and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another