Allowed

Shweta Jhaveri v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Jul 2022BAIL/14453/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court permitted bail to Shweta Jhaveri in CPL arising from Cheque Fraud allegations involving fake gold usage. Court emphasized conditions regarding witness tampering and attorney representation despite applicant's defense of disparate treatment compared to co-accused released earlier.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two local sureties subject to prohibitions on tampering and mandatory attendance on trial dates.

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

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14453 of 2022

¶3

Applicant : Shweta Jhaveri Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Chandra Tripathi,Suresh Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Krishna Mohan Asthana

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, 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.441 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Cannt, District Varanasi.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that, on the basis of fake gold, loan was obtained by the applicant and 11 others. He further submits that except Prateek Rastogi all the co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail by this Hon'ble Court, which has been explained in para 4 of the rejoinder affidavit filed in support of bail application. He next submits that two more cases of similar nature have been registered against the applicant and in both the cases she has been enlarged on bail by this Hon'ble Court, which has also been explained in para 7 of the rejoinder affidavit filed in support of bail application. He further submits that applicant's case is at par with the coaccused persons, who have been 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. He next submits that applicant is a widow lady and languishing in jail since 22.8.2021.

¶8

Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that applicant is a habitual offender of similar nature cases, therefore, she 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 and enlargement of

¶10

applicant on bail in the cases registered against her, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let applicant Shweta Jhaveri involved in the aforesaid case 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 she 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 her counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her 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 her, 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 her in accordance with law.

¶16

Order Date :- 15.7.2022

¶17

m.a.

¶18

Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AYYUB Date: 2022.07.16 10:37:28 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shweta Jhaveri v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shweta Jhaveri 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

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

Dinesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Jubair Vs State of U.P.