Allowed

Mohd. Shamshad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Dec 2022BAIL/31859/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application for Case Crime No. 720 of 2020, the court considered the applicant's claim of innocence and payment of compensation per an alleged compromise. The court allowed bail on a personal bond with two sureties, subject to specific conditions including the payment of a lump sum to the informant.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant released on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions including payment of Rs.5 lacs to the informant.

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

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31859 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd. Shamshad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Kumar Pandey,Atul Kumar,Haya Rizvi,Shahabuddin Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd. Wasim

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ram Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Mohd. Wasim, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi, 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. 720 of 2020, registered under Sections 420, 406, 323, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Muzaffarnagar 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. allegation in the FIR is purely civil in nature and civil suit is pending between the parties. Applicant and informant made compromise on 27.03.2019 and applicant had paid Rs.10 lacs to informant and now he is ready to pay the balance amount to the informant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 09.06.2022. 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. as well as informant's counsel have vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submitted that earlier applicant has not followed the agreement, hence, he should not be enlarged on bail.

¶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, Mohd. Shamshad, 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 conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

4. The applicant will pay a sum of Rs.5 lacs within a month on the date fixed by CJM concerned and thereafter within three months rest of the amount shall be paid to the informant. In default of payment, informant will have right to move bail cancellation application against the applicant.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 14.12.2022

¶17

Nitin Verma

¶18

Digitally signed by NITIN KUMAR VERMA Date: 2022.12.20 11:27:14 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohd. Shamshad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Shamshad 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yatendra Alias Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Talib Vs State of U.P.

Mohatram Vs State of U.P.

Harendra Prasad Gaud Vs State of U.P. and Another

Saida Begum Vs State of U.P.