Allowed

Shanu @ Abhinav Upadhyay v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2022BAIL/15859/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 420 IPC arising from FIR allegations of ATM card fraud, the Court allowed bail noting the absence of any formal complaint by banks or cardholders regarding cheating. Despite pending cases, the Court was satisfied that the applicant would not tamper with evidence and would cooperate with the investigation, releasing him on bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail in Crime No. 354 of 2021 subject to a personal bond and two sureties, on conditions regarding interference with witnesses or evidence.

Shanu @ Abhinav Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15859 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shanu @ Abhinav Upadhyay Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Amit Kumar Shukla, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Pandey, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 354 of 2021, under Section 420 I.P.C., P.S. Qila, District Bareilly.

¶7

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged by a Sub Inspector of Police alleging that the applicant was standing near the A.T.M. and 13 A.T.Ms cards were recovered from him. The F.I.R. further alleges that the applicant gave a confessional statement that he fraudulently exchanges the A.T.M cards of persons and he fraudulently withdraws amounts from their accounts.

¶8

The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that even as per the allegations made in the F.I.R., no case of cheating is made out as neither any A.T.M. card holder nor any bank has made any complaint against the applicant of committing any act which may amount to cheating.

¶9

The applicant has explained his criminal history in para 10 of the affidavit according to which there are five cases pending against the applicant and in all the cases the applicant has been enlarged on bail.

¶10

The applicant is in jail since 28-11-2021. It has also been stated in the affidavit that there is no possibility of the applicant tampering with any evidence and in such circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. It is also stated in the affidavit that the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail and he will fully cooperate in the investigation.

¶11

The learned A.G.A., on the basis of instructions has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant. However, he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the case.

¶12

Keeping in view the aforesaid fact, this Court is satisfied that the applicant has made out a case for being enlarged on bail

¶13

pending conclusion of the trial. The bail application is accordingly allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant - Shanu @ Abhinav Upadhyay be released on bail in Case Crime No. 354 of 2021, under Section 420 I.P.C., P.S. Qila, District Bareilly on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of 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.

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 19.7.2022

¶21

pks

¶22

Digitally signed by PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.07.21 09:50:54 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shanu @ Abhinav Upadhyay v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanu @ Abhinav Upadhyay 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 Qureshi Vs State of U.P.

Harsha @ Hariom Vs State of U.P.

Aditya Khatri Vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra Vs State of U.P.

Lal Babu Vs State of U.P.

Sabroj Ahmad Vs State of U.P.