Allowed

Perminder v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Apr 2022BAIL/14960/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application wherein the applicant Perminder, challenging false implication in cheating and forgery case via co-accused nomination, was allowed bail on furnishing personal bond and sureties before the Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed for the applicant to be released upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions imposed.

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

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14960 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Perminder Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shishir Kumar Tiwari 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. 2149 of 2018 at Police Station Sihani Gate District Ghaziabad under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B and 34 I.P.C. The applicant is in jail since 17.08.2021.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad, on 26.11.2021.

¶7

Shri Shishir Kumar Tiwari, 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 never negotiated any fraudulent deal with any buyer. The applicant was nominated by co-accused Harendra Tyagi in his statement before the police authorities. The said statement insofar as it implicates the applicant is unreliable. The entire consideration was paid to one Rajesh Datta. The applicant is not a beneficiary of any illicit transaction nor did he make any fraudulent representation. Learned counsel for the applicant has

¶8

explained the criminal history of the applicant and 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- Perminder 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 :- 8.4.2022

¶20

Dhananjai

¶21

Digitally signed by DHANANJAI Date: 2022.04.11 09:59:37 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Perminder v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Perminder 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

Shiva Malik Vs State of U.P.

Babloo @ Bullu Vs State of U.P.

Ashif and Another Vs State of U.P.

Anand Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Noor Mohammad @ Thegan Vs State of U.P.

Danish Vs State of U.P.