Allowed

Piyush Mishra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Feb 2022BAIL/2769/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge court disposed of Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2769 of 2022, filed by Piyush Mishra. The judge found the case fit for bail consideration, noting the applicant's lack of criminal history and the impact of the pandemic on jail overcrowding. The bail application was allowed subject to specific conditions regarding witness tampering and surrender.

What did the court decide?

Allowed bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount, subject to specific conditions of conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 92

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2769 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Piyush Mishra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ayank Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

¶5

Second supplementary affidavit filed is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Ayank Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shravan Kumar Ojha learned AGA for the State.

¶7

This bail application purported to be under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. has been moved on behalf of applicant Piyush Mishra for seeking bail in Case Crime No.252 of 2021 under Sections 409 I.P.C. and 67 Information Technology (I.T.) Act, registered at Police Station-Bhuta, District-Bareilly.

¶8

The bail application of the applicant has been rejected by the court below, on 23.12.2021.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that a first information report has been lodged by one Sumnesh Kumar before Police Station-Bhuta, District-Bareilly being FIR No.0252 on 24.8.2021 at 21:26 hours under Sections 409 I.P.C. and 67 Information Technology (I.T.) Act against the applicant with an allegation that the one Ram Prakash possessed an account in the post office and he had deposited certain amount which was tune of Rs.66,730/- which was paid to him along with interest thereon. He has further argued that one Ram Prakash , who has come up with stand, he has been duped by the same amount has made a statement which is at page 28 of the paper book so as to contend that the amount of Rs.65.500/stands credited in his own account.

¶10

According to learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated and further the fact even a departmental proceeding is being sought to be initiated by the issuance of the offence memorandum regarding the manipulation of CIF. He has further contended that initiation of departmental proceedings particularly with criminal proceedings containing the subject matter is not permissible as according to him he is already facing departmental enquiry whatever outcome of the same can be condition for imposition

¶11

of punishment.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of this court towards paragraph 14 so as to contend that the applicant does not possess any criminal history and applicant is languishing in jail since 8.12.2021.

¶13

Countering the said submissions, learned AGA for the State has opposed the bail while arguing that the applicant has committed offence and that is why he has been proceeded with the present proceedings merely because he does not have any criminal history will not matter.

¶14

Considering the submissions so advanced by the learned counsel for the parties on the question of bail, prima facie this Court finds that this is a fit case for grant of bail, as applicant does not have any criminal history, looking into the nature of acquisition, the evidence collected by the I.O, in support of the charge, gravity of offence, nature and severity of the punishment in the case of conviction, complicity of accused and all attending circumstances.

¶15

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.

¶16

In the light of the aforenoted discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶17

Let the applicant Piyush Mishra involved in aforesaid crime 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 with the following conditions that :-

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any

¶22

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.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

Any observations made in granting bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned Trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶26

Taking into consideration that Covid-19 is continuing and due to which certified copy would not be possible to be obtained by the applicant, therefore, if a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of Allahabad High Court and self attested by the counsel for the applicant is placed before the Court, the same would be entertained.

¶27

Order Date :- 8.2.2022 piyush

¶28

Digitally signed by PIYUSH KUMAR Date: 2022.02.09 18:05:27 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Piyush Mishra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Piyush Mishra 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

Omkar Vs State of U.P.

Keshav Dev Lavaniya Bahadur Vs State of U.P.

Moolchandra Vs State of U.P.

Vijendra Kapoor Vs State of U.P.

Madan Vs State of U.P., through Its Principal Secretary Home

Dushyant @ Kanha Vs State of U.P.