Allowed

Vinay Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2022BAIL/2818/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J. allowed the Criminal Misc. Bail Application for Vinay Kumar Gupta, granting release on bail in a case under Sections 420, 467-471, 411, 413, 414, 120-B IPC and PMLA. The court imposed strict conditions regarding presence, evidence tampering, and attendance for key stages of the trial.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties, subject to strict conditions regarding presence in court and specific trial stages.

Vinay Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. — Money Laundering | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2818 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Kant Vishwakarma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The applicant is seeking enlargement on bail in case crime No.618 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 411, 413, 414, 120-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Dibiyapur, District Auraiya.

¶7

The contention is that there is absolutely no allegation of any offence on the part of the applicant in the first information report and the mere fact that at the time when the vehicle was traced, near which the applicant was found present, would not amount to commissioning of any offence by him. It is also stated that the F.I.R., at best, discloses civil dispute, in as much as, named persons, as per the FIR version, have not paid the amount of rent. Since the applicant is in jail since 30.11.2021, it is contended that he is entitled to be enlarged on bail particularly, as the trial is not likely to conclude shortly on account of the ongoing pandemic COVID-19.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant, but could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Let applicant Vinay Kumar Gupta be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶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

¶13

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.

¶14

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iv) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such 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

Order Date :- 7.2.2022 Madhurima

¶18

Digitally signed by MADHURIMA GARG Date: 2022.02.08 14:27:02 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vinay Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinay Kumar Gupta 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

Jasveer Kaur Vs State of U.P.

Rohit Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Arjun Singh Khatik Vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Kasim Vs State of U.P.

Subhan Ansari Vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Yadav Vs State of U.P.