Allowed

Mushtaque Alam v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Jul 2022BAIL/18464/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 18464 of 2022, the Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant, Mushtaque Alam, accused of misappropriation and cheating. Despite a history of 21 prior criminal cases, the court relied on the right to life and liberty under Article 21 and a recent Supreme Court judgment to allow bail subject to strict conditions regarding presence in court and tamperin

What did the court decide?

The applicant, Mushtaque Alam, was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence and ensuring presence in court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18464 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Mushtaque Alam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar Singh,Siddhartha Baghel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

There is allegation against three named accused persons regarding taking money for investment and misappropriating the same.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is not named in the first information report. His name has surfaced during investigation. He is in jail since 13.10.2021. Learned counsel for the applicant admits that applicant has criminal history of 21 cases, which is in his knowledge, there may be more cases in criminal history of applicant of like nature.

¶8

On the other hand learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted herein above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No.5191 of 2021 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant, Mushtaque Alam , involved in Case Crime No.139 of 2020, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, Police Station Cantt., DistrictVaranasi be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶12

(ii) 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.

¶13

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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.

¶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

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

¶17

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶18

Order Date :- 27.7.2022 SS

¶19

Digitally signed by SURENDAR SINGH NARANG Date: 2022.07.27 17:45:27 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mushtaque Alam v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mushtaque Alam 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

Yasveer Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Shakti Singh @ Monu Singh Vs State of U.P.

Kundhan Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Shailesh Yadav Vs State of U.P.