Allowed

Suraj Tiwari v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Sept 2022ABAIL/5492/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted anticipatory bail to Suraj Tiwari in a case involving allegations of forgery and cheating. The application was allowed subject to conditions including non-fleeing, cooperation in trial, and presence at key procedural stages.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till conclusion of trial on personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions regarding travel, passport surrender, and appearance in court.

Suraj Tiwari Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5492 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Suraj Tiwari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nikhil Kumar,Prashant Kanha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed today by the learned A.G.A. is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Suraj Tiwari in Case Crime No. 279 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B I.P.C. Police Station - Kotwali District -Mathura till the conclusion of trial.

¶8

He further submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further submitted that the applicant is Labour Enforcement Officer, Ghazipur where the applicant served upto 31.5.2019. He was transferred to Mathura. The applicant is working under the Assistant Labour Commissioner. F.I.R. was lodged by the Assistant Labour Commissioner against the applicant for committing forgery and making false document. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he never misappropriated money and he has been falsely implicated due to dispute between erstwhile Labour Commissioner Prabhat Kumar Singh. A complaint was lodged against the applicant by one Sadhna Kumari. On the basis of this compliant enquiry was commenced and it was found that some of the workers received unauthorized grants for marriage of their children. In this regard, the applicant also lodged complaint before SSP, Mathura for disbursement of public money to some unauthorized workers. The applicant is ready to cooperate with the investigation.Further submission is that the applicant fully cooperated with the investigation.Hence, the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail and he is ready to cooperate with the trial. If the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he will never misuse the same. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on a judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi)

¶9

and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 , it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶12

In the instant case, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶13

In the event of arrest the applicant is arrested, he/her shall be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial in the aforesaid case for the aforesaid offences on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

The applicant shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶15

The applicant shall surrender passports, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. The passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.

¶16

That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶17

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that the applicant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶18

In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila

¶19

Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1.

¶20

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. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition 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.

¶21

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶22

Order Date :- 28.9.2022

¶23

Anuj Singh

¶24

Digitally signed by ANUJ PRATAP SINGH Date: 2022.09.28 13:42:22 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Suraj Tiwari v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Tiwari v. State of U.P.

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

Rishabh Chaturvedi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mumtaz and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rav Gautam @ Ravishankar Gautam Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aditya and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Anivesh Alias Ashu @ Alias Abhinesh Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Jamila Khatoon Vs State of U.P. and Another