Allowed

Karmveer Panchal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2022BAIL/12570/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court of Judicature at Allahabad disposed of a criminal bail application filed by Karmveer Panchal facing charges of fraud and cheque dishonour. The court allowed bail without expressing an opinion on merits, subject to strict conditions regarding attendance, evidence tampering, and fees payment.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties with specific undertakings to attend court and not tamper with evidence.

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

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12570 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Karmveer Panchal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rizwan Ullah Siddiqui,Kulveer Singh,Santosh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amit Rai

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Kulveer Singh, learned counsel for the informant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Karmveer Panchal, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 06 of 2021, under Sections 409, 420, 506, 120-B IPC, Police Station Sadar Bazar, District- Saharanpur, during pendency of trial.

¶8

There is allegation against the applicant that he is Director of finance company and he has got investment from several investors, but has defrauded repayment of the invested amount and dividend thereon.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that dividend was being paid to the investors for certain period, but on account of Covid-19, payment of dividend was discontinued and paid subsequently. Applicant agreed that amount of the informant due shall be paid to him, but cheques given in this regard have been dishonoured. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that for enforcement the agreement and the offence of dishonour of cheques, the informant has alternative remedy instead of lodging the FIR against the applicant. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case due to some ulterior motives. He has no criminal history to his credit and he is languishing in jail since 24.12.2021. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. and Sri Kulveer Singh, learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that the applicant has misappropriated the money the investors. The applicant is Director of the company. This fact is also admitted in the rejoinder affidavit. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime

¶12

be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶14

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when 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.

¶15

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(v) 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 absence of the applicant 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.

¶18

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶20

Order Date :- 19.7.2022 Ruchi Agrahari

¶21

Digitally signed by RUCHI AGRAHARI Date: 2022.07.19 17:55:17 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Karmveer Panchal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karmveer Panchal 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kishore Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Arif Vs State of U.P.

Balram Singh Rajpoot Vs Union Of India

Mohd. Saleem Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.