Allowed

Lakshya Tawar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Jun 2022BAIL/3207/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving cheating and forgery. The court allowed the bail application after finding merit in the submission that the applicant was falsely implicated and posed no flight risk.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 43

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3207 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Lakshya Tawar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vikash Chandra Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.1651 of 2021 at Police Station-Kavi Nagar, District-Ghaziabad under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 409, 120B IPC. The applicant is in jail since 30.08.2021.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad on 06.12.2021.

¶7

Shri Shri Nitin Sharma, learned counsel assisted by Shri Vikash Chandra Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant contend that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant was nominated in this case after his arrest registered as case crime no.700 of 2020 and became a convenient scapegoat for the police authorities. One Vishal Goyal was a borrower in the offending transaction. The informant was admittedly a guarantor in the loan agreement executed between the borrower-Vikash Goyal, the

¶8

informant and the bank authorities. There was no pivity of contract between the applicant, bank authorities and the borrower or the guarantor. The applicant had no concern with the aforesaid transaction. The said transaction was processed by the bank authorities after due diligence and adherence to such procedures of identifying and ensuring full particulars of the guarantors. The applicant and the said Vikas Goyal have a business relationship. The said Vikas Goyal credited some money into the bank account of the wife of the applicant in pursuance of a business transaction. The amount was returned to the said Vikas Goyal and accounts are settled.

¶9

Explaining the criminal history of the applicant, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has become an easy scapegoat for the police authorities who have falsely framed him in various cases which was actuated by malice. The said criminal cases do not depict commission of any heinous crime by the applicant and have no bearing on the instant case. The applicant is not a flight risk and there is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶10

Shri Indra Prakash Srivastava, learned A.G.A.

¶11

could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. However, he does not contest the criminal history of the applicant as disclosed in the supplementary affidavit.

¶12

I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶13

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

¶14

Let the applicant-Lakshya Tawar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶15

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness. (iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make 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

¶18

evidence.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 1.6.2022 Ashish Tripathi

¶20

Digitally signed by ASHISH NAYAN TRIPATHI Date: 2022.06.02 15:51:12 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lakshya Tawar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakshya Tawar 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

Kamlesh Kumar Ram Vs State of U.P.

Anant Pal@ Anant Ram@ Antu Vs State of U.P.

Arjun Vs State of U.P.

Chandralok Vs State of U.P.

Manak Mimoh Bharti Vs State of U.P.

Washim Khan @ Shahid Khan Vs State of U.P.