Allowed

Shivji Gupta v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Sept 2022BAIL/33729/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous bail application concerning Sections 419, 420, 406, and 506 IPC, the High Court granted bail to the applicant. The court noted the release of co-accused and the nature of allegations, imposing specific conditions regarding court attendance and objections to adjournments during the trial.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail under personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions regarding attendance and trial conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33729 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shivji Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Apul Misra,Gaurav Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Hriday Kumar Singh,Jai Prakash Prasad

¶4

Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and Shri Hriday Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant, and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 120/2020, under Sections 419, 420, 406, 506 IPC, Police StationZigna, District - Mirzapur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime. He further submits that the applicant had no concern with the affairs of the alleged company and the applicant was neither in the Board of Directors, nor was in any active participation or control over the affairs of the other alleged companies after his resignation. He further submits that the complainant himself was holding the post of Director of the Company and he was also active in the business during the period 2011-19. He further submits that the complainant and his associates have illegally misappropriated the funds by creating multiple parallel companies and have resigned from the alleged companies in planned manner and thereafter, lodged FIR against the applicant. He further submits that the FIR has been lodged belatedly and without valid proof of receipt or entries of the ledger records. It is urged that co-accused, Brijesh Kumar Pandey has already been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.1.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 28697 of 2019; the applicant has no other criminal antecedent; he is languishing in jail since 14.04.2022; the trial is not likely to be concluded expeditiously in the near future. Applicant undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not seek unnecessary adjournments except with the leave of the court, he further undertakes that if enlarged on bail, he will never misuse his liberty and will cooperate in the trial. .

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail, but he has not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the accusedapplicant that co-accused have already been released on bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in mind that co-accused have already been released on bail by this Court and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶10

Let applicant, namely, Shivji Gupta, be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime Number on furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that the applicant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence 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.

¶12

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

¶13

(iii) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure the applicant's 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 the applicant, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) 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 the applicant in accordance with law.

¶15

Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.

¶16

Order Date :- 12.9.2022 Amit Mishra

¶17

(Piyush Agrawal,J.)

¶18

Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2022.09.12 16:22:19 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shivji Gupta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivji 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

Deepak Kumar Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Raghuvansh Raman Vs Union of India and Others

Hari Narain Vs Xii A.D.J. Agra and Others

Indresh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Rangnath Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home

Ajay Chauhan Vs State of U.P.