Allowed

Asha Vishwakarma v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Aug 2022BAIL/12257/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Grants bail to Asha Vishwakarma in a gold loan fraud case involving cheating under IPC, as she has met requirements similar to co-accused already released. Applicants filed affidavits while bank alleged collusion causing fake gold certification.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail furnishing personal bond and two sureties. Conditions include repayment of loan amount by 09.09.2022 and appearing in trial court.

Asha Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. — Money Laundering | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12257 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Asha Vishwakarma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Babu Lal Ram,Gyanendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Krishna Mohan Asthana

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

1.Heard Sri Babu Lal Ram, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Padney, the learned Additional Government Advocate, Sri Krishna Mohan Asthana, the learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

¶6

2.The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 0253 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 409, 120-B IPC, Police Station Maduwadeeh, District Varanasi during pendency of the trial in the Court below.

¶7

3.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged by the Branch Manager of Canara Bank, Lahartara Branch, Varanasi against ten accused persons, including the applicant, alleging that the Bank was in the business of granting gold loan after taking hypothetication of gold from its customers. Before hypothetication, the purity of gold is evaluated by the Bank's approved valuer and from time to time the Bank randomly gets the purity of the hypothecated gold evaluated by some others approved valuer also.

¶8

4.On 31-07-2021, when the Bank got some hypotheticated gold valued by another valuer, it came to the light that the Bank approved valuer Ravindra Prakash Seth (accused no.10) had furnished a wrong valuation report in respect of nine customers including the applicant, on the basis of which the bank has granted loans to those customers.

¶9

5.In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application it has been stated that the allegations made in the F.I.R. are false.

¶10

6.The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that it is the applicant who has been cheated by the Bank because at the time of taking loan on the basis of security of gold, the Bank had issued a certificate in the name of 'Gold Loan Account Pass Card' certifying that the applicant had deposited certain gold items mentioned in the certificate with the Bank and the

¶11

aforesaid certificate has been signed by the Manager of the bank. In case subsequently the gold kept in custody of the Bank has been found to be fake, it is the Bank and its officials who are responsible for replacing the gold by some fake material.

¶12

7.In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the informant-Bank it has been stated that the Bank has formulated a "Gold Loan Lending" 2021-22, a copy whereof has been field with the counter affidavit and as per the provisions contained in Clause 2.4 of the aforesaid policy the Bank has empaneled Shri Ravindra Prakash Seth (accused no.10) as a jewel appraiser from 19-03-2021. Relying upon the report of the aforesaid jewell appraiser gold loan have been granted to the several borrowers including the applicant. However, subsequently on surprise re-appraisal of the gold loan on 31-07-2021 through another approved appraiser of the Bank as per Gold Loan Policy, it was found that the earlier appraiser Ravindra Prakash Seth had certified fake jewellery as pure gold. It has further been stated in the counter affidavit that the aforesaid jewell appraiser Shri Ravindra Prakash Seth had acted in collusion with the co-accused Pratik Rastogi, who is the main conspirator along with other gold loan borrowers.

¶13

8.The applicant has filed a rejoinder affidavit in which it reiterated that it appears that some Bank employees have cheated the applicant and other account holders who had taken gold loans. It has further been stated in the rejoinder affidavit that as many as seven other co-accused persons have already been granted bail in the aforesaid crime and copies of the bail orders have been annexed with the rejoinder affidavit.

¶14

9.The learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that even as per the documents available on record the gold furnished by the applicant for obtaining a loan had been accepted by the Bank with full satisfaction as per the report submitted by an approved valuer and the Bank Manager had himself issued a certificate to this effect.

¶15

10.It has been stated in the affidavit that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and that she has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 26.08.2021.

¶16

11.The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the co-accused perons Amit Sharma and Shekhar Kumar Maurya have been released on bail by means of orders dated 25.03.2022 21.04.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 55447 of 2021 and 10990 of 2022 respectively.

¶17

12.The learned counsel for the applicant has has further stated

¶18

that the case set up against the applicant is similar to that set up against the other co-accused persons, who have already been released on bail. Therefore, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.

¶19

13.Per contra, Sri Krishna Mohan Asthana, the learned counsel for the informant and the learned Additional Government Advocate have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail but they could not dispute the aforesaid aspects and that the case set up against the applicant is similar to that set up against the other co-accused persons, who have already been released on bail.

¶20

14.Keeping in view the aforesaid fact, this Court is satisfied that the applicant has made out a case for being enlarged on bail pending conclusion of the trial. The bail application is accordingly allowed. In light of the preceding discussion and without making any observation on the merit of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶21

13.Let the applicant - Asha Vishwakarma be released on bail in Case Crime No. 0253 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 409, 120-B IPC, Police Station Maduwadeeh, District Varanasi on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to the following conditions:-

¶22

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶23

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶24

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶25

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise 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.

¶26

(v) The applicant shall repay the entire amount of loan to the bank by 09.09.2022.

¶27

15.In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application before this Court seeking cancellation of the bail.

¶28

Order Date :- 1.8.2022/Ashish Pd.

¶29

Digitally signed by ASHISH PRASAD Date: 2022.08.05 11:41:57 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Asha Vishwakarma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asha Vishwakarma 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Teepu Ram Gond Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Vs State of U.P.

Brajesh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Vs State of U.P.

Bablu Nagar Vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Ahmad Vs State of U.P.