Allowed

Lavpreet @ Labbu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Apr 2022BAIL/13027/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application before Court No. 68, the High Court allowed the release of the applicant, Lavpreet @ Labbu, on bail. The court found merit in the submission that the applicant was falsely implicated as he was not named in the FIR and the prosecution evidence was weak. The bail application was allowed subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was ordered to be released on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and specific conditions regarding trial attendance and non-tampering with evidence.

Lavpreet @ Labbu Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13027 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Lavpreet @ Labbu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 96 of 2021 at Police Station-Galshahid, District-Moradabad under Sections 411 I.P.C. The applicant is in jail since 29.09.2021.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court, Moradabad on 29.11.2021.

¶7

Shri Mukund Yadav, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Rajesh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant was not named in the F.I.R. The applicant was nominated in a statement made by co-accused Pawan before the police authorities. The said statement insofar as it implicates the applicant is unreliable. The principal offender Pawan had also admitted that he had stolen the motorcycles. There is no independent witness to the recovery. Prosecution evidence does not connect the applicant with the offence. Explaining the criminal history of the

¶8

applicant, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the prior to the instant case, the applicant does not have any criminal history.

¶9

Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that the applicant does not have any criminal history prior to the instant case.

¶10

I see merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶11

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant- Lavpreet @ Labbu be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

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

¶14

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶15

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

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted

¶17

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.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 18.4.2022

¶20

Dhananjai

¶21

Digitally signed by DHANANJAI Date: 2022.04.24 14:12:05 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lavpreet @ Labbu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lavpreet @ Labbu 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

Mohd. Afsaar Alias Afsar Vs State of U.P.

Raju Yadav @ Raju Mota @ Raju Kantewala Vs State of U.P.

Arun Pratap Singh @ Sachin Gurjar Vs State of U.P. and Anothes

Kamre Alam Khan Vs State of U.P.

Narendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bholu @ Istekhar Vs State of U.P.