Disposed

Kuldeep Prajapati v. State of U.P and Another

Allahabad HC7 Apr 2022ABAIL/2256/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge disposed anticipatory bail application under S. 438 Cr.P.C. for cheating offences. Granted leave to move bail to trial court within 20 days before hearing and strict disposal as per Supreme Court law in Satender Kumar Antill.

What did the court decide?

Leave granted to move bail application to trial court within 20 days with direction for strict disposal in accordance with law.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2256 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Kuldeep Prajapati Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present anticipatory bail application has been moved by the accused-applicant- Kuldeep Prajapati, in Case Crime No.109 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420 I.P.C., Police Station Atrauliya, District Azamgarh, with the prayer to grant him anticipatory bail in the above mentioned case.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant while pressing the anticipatory bail application submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.

¶8

It is further submitted that it is a case of false implication, however, the allegations against the applicant were that he had withdrawn Rs.41,000/- illegally from the account of another person, however, the amount of Rs.41,000/-, which was alleged to have been withdrawn by the applicant, has now been deposited with the Union Bank of India, Branch Lohara.

¶9

It is further submitted that the charge sheet in the case has already been filed without making arrest of the applicant and the summoning order has also been passed, but the applicant is having an apprehension that when he will appear before the court below, hearing of his bail application would take time in the intervening period, he may be compelled to remain in prison and thus the facility of anticipatory of bail be extended to him.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that when the charge sheet in the matter has already been submitted under Sections 419, 420 I.P.C. and investigation is not in progress nor any coercive process has been issued by the trial court after taking cognizance, the applicant is not having any apprehension of being arrested and thus the instant anticipatory bail application is not maintainable.

¶11

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is an admitted fact that the applicant has not been arrested during the course of investigation and the charge sheet has been filed without arresting him under Sections 419, 420 I.P.C. Both these offences are punishable with upto 7 years of imprisonment.

¶12

Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the fact that the alleged offences against the applicant, wherein the charge sheet has been filed, are punishable with upto 7 years of imprisonment, the instant anticipatory bail application moved by the applicant is disposed of in terms that if an application of bail within 20 days from today is moved before the trial court by the applicant, the same shall be disposed of by the trial court strictly in accordance with the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antill Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others : MANU/SC/1024/2021 after providing an opportunity of being heard to the parties.

¶13

Order Date :- 7.4.2022 Anupam S/-

¶14

Digitally signed by ANUPAM SINGH PATEL Date: 2022.04.07 17:34:45 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kuldeep Prajapati v. State of U.P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep Prajapati 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

Om Prakash @ Balla Pasi Vs State of U.P.

Vishnu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Phool Singh and 2 Other Vs State of U.P.

Vikas Rathaur Vs State of U.P.

Akarsh Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shivam@ Ponu and 4 Others Vs State of U.P.