Allowed

Dinesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Jul 2022BAIL/16705/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In bail application regarding alleged misuse of Aadhar authentication for essential commodities, the High Court enlarged the applicant on bail on personal and local sureties, imposing strict conditions to ensure presence and non-tampering with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Release on personal bond and two local sureties each of like amount, subject to undertakings and appearance conditions.

Dinesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16705 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Singh 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 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. 1488 of 2018, under Section 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, 39 The Adhar (Targeted Delivery Of Financial and other Subsidy Benefit Services) Act, 2016 and 66(C) I.T. Act and 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, P.S. Lisari Gate, District Meerut.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to prosecution version, applicant and other co-accused through e- pos machine misused the Aadhar authentication system for given the benefit of essential commodities. He further submits that computer operator misused the Aadhar Card of the applicant, he has been falsely implicated in the present case as well as in 17 other cases. In 11 cases he has been enlarged on bail. Shahnawaz was a computer operator, who scanned Adhar Card for misusing. He has been enlarged on bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Applicatiion No. 9869 of 2021 vide order dated 12.03.2021, therefore, on the ground of parity applicant is entitled for bail. He next submits that 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 and the applicant is languishing in jail since 25.11.2020.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A.has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by submitting that 17 more cases are registered against the applicant, applicant and co-accused Shahnawaz and fair price shop dealer Vakeel Ahmad being in collusion misused the essential commodities depriving to the entitled ration cardholders, therefore, applicant is not entitled for bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, applicant is a cardholder, co-accused Shahnawaz, computer

¶10

operator enlarged on bail and perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant Dinesh Kumar involved in 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 shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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.

¶12

(ii) 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.

¶13

(iii) 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 in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) 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.

¶15

Order Date :- 14.7.2022 MAA/-

¶16

Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AZAD ANSARI Date: 2022.07.15 17:11:06 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Narayan Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Satendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Kallu Vs State of U.P.

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.