Allowed

Dinesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Jul 2022BAIL/13903/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application for non-bailable offences including cheating and forgery, the Court granted bail to the applicant along with personal and local sureties based on the enlargement of a co-accused and lack of flight risk. Specific conditions were imposed regarding conduct during trial.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions regarding conduct, attendance, and no tampering.

Dinesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Money Laundering | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13903 of 2022

¶3

Applicant : Dinesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Shahnawaz Shah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.726 of 2018, under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471, 120B I.P.C. and Section 66C I.T. Act & Section 39 of Aadhaar Act, 3/7 E.C. Act, Police Station Nauchandi, District Meerut.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per FIR version ration-card of the applicant was misused in distributing the essential commodities by the fair price shop scanning the Adhaar Card and changing its number. He further submits that co-accused Shahnawaz, computer operator, who scanned the adhar card has been enlarged on bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated 27.5.2022 in Criminal Misc.Bail Application No.7617 of 2022, however, case crime number has been mistakenly typed as 7626 of 2018, which should be only 726 of 2018. He next submits that applicant's case is at par with the co-accused enlarged on bail. He further submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.4.2021.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that there is no reason to falsely implicate the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve any benevolence.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence, enlargement of co-accused on bail, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let applicant Dinesh Kumar involved in the aforesaid case

¶10

crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶11

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

¶12

(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.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

(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.

¶16

Order Date :- 15.7.2022

¶17

m.a.

¶18

Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AYYUB Date: 2022.07.16 10:37:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dinesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saleem Vs State of U.P.

Talib Vs State of U. P. thr. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U. P. at Luck

Shivam Jaiswal Vs State of U.P.

Subhan Vs State of U.P through Secretary Home

Shweta Jhaveri Vs State of U.P.

Jubair Vs State of U.P.