In a bail application under a cheating and forgery case, the High Court granted bail to the applicant. The judgment noted the State's failure to specifically deny certain averments regarding fund deposits and the prior release of a co-accused.
Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.
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. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10407 of 2022
Applicant :- Shamsher Ahmad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Johri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
On a query being put, learned AGA submitted that he has complete instructions in the matter, as such, this Court proceeded to hear the application for grant of bail on merits.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 424 of 2021, under Sections- 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Jahanabad, District Pilibhit.
The submissions of learned counsel for the applicant are that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case. The applicant is in jail since 20.12.2021 and possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is very bleak.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the FIR dated 10.12.2021 was lodged in counter blast to the complaint preferred by the applicant registered as Case No. 46580 of 2021. This complaint was presented before the court concerned on 02.12.2021 by the informant. It is further submitted that allegation in the F.I.R. are to the effect that applicant and co-accused Shamshad duped certain amount from the informant and others on the ground that they would manage appointment in the Government. It is further submitted that as per the informant, the amount was given to the applicant and co-accused. The amount in issue i.e. Rs. 4,00,000/- out of which Rs. 1,00,000/- was given through Bank Account No. 35622372350 of the wife of the informant namely Preeti through Cheque no. 790686. It appears from the F.I.R. that Rs. 3 lacs were returned back to the informant by the applicant and co-accused through cheque. It is further submitted
that considering the specific by informant averments made para no. 10 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application, as per which no amount was deposited in the bank account of the applicant or any other person, the learned AGA was directed to file the counter affidavit indicating therein the details of specific amount. In the counter affidavit, learned AGA has not indicated anything in relation to the amount indicated in the FIR. In the counter affidavit specific denial has not been made in respect of aforesaid. It is further submitted that no amount was provided in the bank account of the applicant nor the applicant issued the cheque as indicated in the F.I.R.. The learned AGA based upon counter affidavit as also the case diary available with him stated that on this aspect, in the instructions as also in the counter affidavit, nothing has been indicated. It is further submitted that co-accused Shamshad has already been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 24.02.2022 passed in Criminal Misc Bail Application No. 6601 of 2022. As such, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
It is next submitted that there is no possibility of tampering of any evidence. In such circumstances, applicant is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that the applicant will never misuse the liberty of bail and shall fully cooperate with the prosecution.
Learned A.G.A., on the basis of instructions, opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant. However, he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the case.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, as well as totality of facts and circumstances and keeping in mind the date of F.I.R. and the date of complaint filed by the applicant, as also the fact that in the counter affidavit the state has not specifically denied the averments indicated in para no. 10 of the affidavit as per which no amount was deposited in the account of the applicant by informant or any other person as also the fact that co-accused has already been enlarged on bail, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant - Shamsher Ahmad be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime Number on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to
following conditions:-
(1) Applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.
(2) Applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.
(3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 27.5.2022
Sanjeet
Digitally signed by SANJEET KUMAR YADAV Date: 2022.05.31 09:56:56 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to release on bail given the lack of specific denial by the State on the non-deposit of money in his bank account.
Whether the delay in conclusion of the trial and the false implication of the applicant justify the grant of bail.
Shamsher Ahmad
State of U.P.
Saurabh Lavania
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
