Allowed

Amit Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Jul 2022BAIL/24045/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal miscellaneous bail application sought release of the applicant accused of ATM hacking under IPC and IT Act. The court cited lack of complaints from account holders and suspected false implication to grant bail on a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding tampering, witness influence, and court appearances.

Amit Chauhan Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24045 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Amit Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Istyak Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Istiyak Khan, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Kamlesh Kumar Nishad, the learned Additional Government Advocate, Sri Dinesh Kumar Srivastava, the learned counsel for the informant, and perused the record.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 397 of 2022, under Sections 420, 379, 411 IPC and 43/66 Information Technology Act, Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar during pendency of the trial in the Court below.

¶7

The first information report has been lodged by the SubInspector of Police against the applicant and another named accused namely, Constable Amit Chaudhary alleging that the Mukhbir (informer) had informed him that the accused persons are involved in ATM hacking. The F.I.R. alleges that the applicant was apprehended and taken into custody while he was standing on the place where the raid was conducted. It is submitted that 15 ATM cards and Rs. 7,200/- in cash have been recovered from the possession of the applicant.

¶8

It has been stated in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicant is an innocent person and is not concerned at all in commission of any offence. He has falsely been implicated by the police. Out of the numerous ATM cards alleged to have been recovered from the applicant, none is said to have been used by the applicant and no complaint has been filed by any account holder or bank alleging any financial loss caused by the applicant.

¶9

The learned counsel for the applicant has stated that in absence of any complaint made by any account holder or any bank and also in absence of any particulars of any transactions made by the applicant, no offence against the applicant is made out.

¶10

The applicant is languishing in jail since 19.04.2022.

¶11

It has been stated in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that there is no possibility of the applicant tampering with any evidence. In such circumstances, applicant is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail and he will fully cooperate in the investigation.

¶12

Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail.

¶13

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I find it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶14

In the light of preceding discussion and without making any observation on the merit of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant Amit Chauhan be released on bail inCase Crime No. 397 of 2022, under Sections 420, 379, 411 IPC and 43/66 Information Technology Act, Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to the following conditions:-

¶16

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶18

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶19

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application before this Court seeking cancellation of the bail.

¶21

Order Date :- 14.7.2022 Ashish Pd.

¶22

Digitally signed by ASHISH PRASAD Date: 2022.07.19 09:39:00 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Amit Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Chauhan 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

Sunil Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Agarwal Vs State of U.P.

Raj Kumar Cahar Vs State of U.P.

Bittu Bharti Vs State of U.P.

Tannu @ Tej Singh Vs State of U.P.

Baseem Vs State of U.P.