Allowed

Gyasuddin v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Jul 2022BAIL/23491/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the bail application of an accused falsely implicated in fraud involving fraudulent withdrawal via misused mobile number, citing Article 21 of the Constitution, without expressing an opinion on merits and imposing standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to various conditions regarding evidence tampering, attendance at hearings, and breach consequences.

Gyasuddin Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23491 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Gyasuddin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Shahi,Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi 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There is allegation against the applicant that he had withdrawn fraudulently amount from the account of the informant.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the authorized railway ticket booking agent. His mobile phone number was misused in on-line transaction by co-accused persons. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He is in jail since 05.10.2021 and has criminal history of two cases.

¶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 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, Gyasuddin , involved in Case Crime No.961 of 2021, under Section 402 I.P.C & under Section 66-D of IT Act, Police Station Hapur Nagar, District Hapur 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

¶15

proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(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.

¶17

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.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 5.7.2022 SS

¶20

Digitally signed by SURENDAR SINGH NARANG Date: 2022.07.05 18:17:18 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Gyasuddin v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gyasuddin 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

Manish Sharma . T.G.2 Vs State of U.P.

Pawan @ Pankaj Vs State of U.P.

Prem Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sheelendra Vs State of U.P.

Deepanshu Vs State of U.P.

Hafiz Ali Vs State of U.P.