Allowed

Sandeep Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Sept 2022BAIL/29502/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail application filed by Sandeep Kumar in a case involving cheating under IPC Section 420 and IT Act Sections 66C/66D. The applicant argued he was falsely implicated after resigning from the company. The court granted bail subject to bonds and sureties and specific bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount.

Sandeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29502 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rohit Shukla,Amit Daga 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 with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.155 of 2021, registered under Section 420 I.P.C. and Section 66C/66D of I.T. Act, Police Station Sadabad, District Hathras during pendency of the trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Initially the applicant was an employee of the company as Station Manager and submitted his resignation in the month of December, 2020. The incident took place on 01.02.2021 after the resignation of the applicant, hence, the applicant has no concern with the present case. No evidence against the applicant regarding leak of password of the company. The applicant is not named in the FIR. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is languishing in jail since 20.04.2022. In case, the applicant is released 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 law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another , S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , 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, Sandeep Kumar, 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 satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following

¶11

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 :- 14.9.2022 Nitin Verma

¶17

Digitally signed by NITIN KUMAR VERMA Date: 2022.09.17 15:47:49 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sandeep Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Kumar 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

Dharmendra Pratap Vs State of U.P.

Ram Chandra Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ayushi Agrawal Vs State of U.P.

Dada Ram Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar Gautam Vs State of U.P.

Surya Pratap Maurya @ Surya Vs State of U.P.