Allowed

Balram Prajapti v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Jun 2022BAIL/25011/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail application for an accused charged with cheating, forgery, and criminal breach of trust who alleged false implication and marginal witness role. The bail was granted subject to standard conditions including cooperation and non-tampering.

What did the court decide?

Released on personal bond and two sureties in like amount, subject to verified sureties and specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25011 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Balram Prajapati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Karuna Nand Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.927 of 2014, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, District Maharajganj, during pendency of the trial.

¶7

It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case; the applicant has no role in the commission of alleged offence; he is only a marginal witness. It is further argued that co-accused, namely, Shiv Gopal, against whom the role assigned as marginal witness, has been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.05.2018 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.11231 of 2018, a copy of the said order has been annexed to the bail application. Moreover, there is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future. The applicant is languishing in jail since 09.05.2022 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and co-operate in trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.

¶9

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the mandate laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, 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, Balram Prajapati, who is involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the

¶11

satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶13

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶14

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶16

Order Date :- 24.6.2022 Meenu

¶17

Digitally signed by MEENU SINGH Date: 2022.06.24 18:38:29 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Balram Prajapti v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balram Prajapti 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

Narendra Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pooran Prasad Gupta Vs State of U.P and Another

Sandeep @ Sohanveer Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Gangawar Vs State of U.P.

Afsar Ali Vs State of U.P.