Bail application filed under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC regarding forgery of service documents. Court allowed bail after hearing counsel.
Release of the applicant on bail upon executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to specified conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 92
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23702 of 2022
Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Maurya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar,Narendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.566 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police StationManjhanpur, District-Kaushambi.
As per version of the FIR, applicant has submitted forged and fabricated Mark-sheet as well as Transfer Certificate of Class 8th at the time of submission of application form for the post of 'Chaukidar' and on the basis of such forged documents, he got service of Class-IV.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He submits that aforesaid FIR has been lodged against the applicant without mentioning the date of incident after ten years of the resignation from the service of the applicant. He further submits that the institution namely, Krishna Junior High School, Kaushambi, in which applicant was studying in the year 1994 and passed the Class-8th, was closed before 3-4 years and no record is available, but in collusion with the informant, such evidence is created by the Investigating Officer. He further submits applicant is no way involved in committing the aforesaid offence. He further submits that apart from the instant case, applicant does not have any criminal history. He submits that applicant is a law abiding citizen and 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 07.03.2022.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts on record.
Having heard learned counsel for both the parties, gone through
the material placed on record and considering the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction but without commenting on the merits of the case, a case for bail is made out, accordingly allowed.
Let the applicant, Manoj Kumar Maurya, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail on their executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
(iii) The applicant shall not threaten the informant and witnesses and further shall cooperate in the investigation.
(iv) The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.
In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned court below will take recourse to law of cancellation of bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 12.10.2022 Ashutosh
Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH SINGH Date: 2022.10.14 17:59:35 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in the said criminal case.
Manoj Kumar Maurya
Gajendra Kumar
Ashutosh Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
