Allowed

Dharmendra Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 May 2022BAIL/14055/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 417, 420, 406, 467, 504, 506, 468, 471 IPC, the High Court allowed the petitioner's application. The court found merit in the submission that the petitioner was falsely implicated and lacked effective prior jail record, releasing him on bail with conditions to prevent interference with evidence and secure the trial.

What did the court decide?

The applicant-Dharmendra Kumar was released on bail in Crime No.115 of 2021 by executing a personal bond and obtaining two sureties.

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

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14055 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar,Kalp Dev Mishra,Shishir Tandon Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramji Singh Patel,Swetashwa Agarwal

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant is taken in the record.

¶6

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.115 of 2021 at Police Station-Shivpur, DistrictVaranasi under Sections 417, 420, 406, 467, 504, 506, 468, 471 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 11.12.2021.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Varanasi on 23.02.2022.

¶8

Shri Shishir Tandon, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant was not a trustee at the relevant point in time. He had resigned prior to the disputed transactions. The applicant did not embezzle the funds of the trust. The applicant did not make any fraudulent representation to induce the people to invest in the

¶9

trust. As per the case of the informant, no money was credited to the bank account of the applicant. The informant had transferred money in the accounts of various other trustees for which the applicant cannot be held responsible. The applicant is not the beneficiary of any illicit transaction. Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned A.G.A. as well as Shri Ramji Singh Patel, learned counsel for the informant could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. However, learned AGA points out that the applicant has criminal history of two more cases apart from those explained in the bail application.

¶10

Rejoining the issue, Shri Shishir Tandon, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in jail since 11.12.2021 and does not have any effective pairokar, who can produce details of all the cases pending against him. However, relying on the records of the learned A.G.A., and upon instructions from the applicant, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was framed in similar cases relating to the trust. The said cases do not depict commission of any heinous crimes and have no bearing on the instant bail application. The applicant is not a flight risk and there is no possibility of his influencing

¶11

witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

Let the applicant-Dharmendra Kumar 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 concerned subject to following conditions.

¶15

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

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness. (iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶17

(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.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the

¶19

prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶20

Order Date :- 25.5.2022 Ashish Tripathi

¶21

Digitally signed by ASHISH NAYAN TRIPATHI Date: 2022.05.30 11:17:22 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dharmendra Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmendra 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

Om Prakash Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh @ Rajeshwar Prasad Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Kumar Vs the Zonal Director Narcotics Control Bureau

Hariom Verma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Lodha @ Sameer Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav Dubey @ Golu Dubey Vs State of U.P.