Allowed

Kausar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2022BAIL/18003/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge of Allahabad High Court granted bail to Kausar, accused under Sections 420, 406 and 506 I.P.C., subject to furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties. Bail was granted on the condition that the applicant return Rs.23 lacs to the informant within two months of release and abide by specific conditions regarding attendance and non-tampering with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two local sureties each of like amount, subject to conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18003 of 2022

¶3

Applicant : Kausar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd Faiz 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 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.576 of 2021, under Sections 420, 406, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kairana, District Shamli.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per FIR version informant paid Rs.23 lacs for purchase of applicant's land out of which Rs.9 lacs was transferred from the account of the informant through RTGS and remaining was paid in cash. He further submits that the property was mortgaged to Prathma Gramin Bank due to which property could not be transferred. He next submits that applicant is ready to return the amount of Rs.23 lacs to the informant within a period of two months from the date of his release. He next submits that applicant has no criminal history. 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. It is next contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.9.2021.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that there is no reason to falsely implicate the applicant, therefore, he 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, readiness of the applicant to return the amount to the informant within two months from the date of his release, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let applicant Kausar involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two

¶10

local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall return the amount of Rs.23 lacs to the informant within a period of two months from the date of his release, failing which, his bail shall be treated to be cancelled, automatically.

¶12

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence and pressurize the witnesses during trial.

¶13

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.

¶14

(iv) 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.

¶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 him in accordance with law.

¶16

Order Date :- 4.7.2022

¶17

m.a.

¶18

Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AYYUB Date: 2022.07.06 12:35:29 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kausar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kausar 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

Smt. Sheela Devi Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav @ Vivekanand Srivastava Vs State of U.P.

Mohit Tripathi Vs State of U.P.

Munendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Vs State of U.P.

Haseen Vs State of U.P.