Kivikali v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
Bail application allowed in a cheating and IT Act case. Court granted bail citing parity with a co-accused brother already released, return of involved funds, lack of criminal history, and gender.
What did the court decide?
Released on bail subject to personal bond and two sureties with conditions against tampering, influencing witnesses, leaving India, and non-appearance.
What the court decided
Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34716 of 2022
Applicant :- Kivikali Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kapil Tyagi,Gayyoor Ali,Rajiv Sisodia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1.Heard Sri Rajiv Sisodia, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Pandey, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2.The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 429 of 2020, under Sections 420 I.P.C. and 66-D of Information Technology Act, P.S. Sector-39 Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar.
3.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged against six named accused persons (not including the applicant), alleging that the accused persons fraudulently induced the informant to make investment in a company under an alurement of lucrative returns but subsequently it transpired that the informant had been cheated by the accused persons. During investigation, it came to light that a sum of Rs. 1,60,000/- has been transferred to Pangaea Technology International Private Limited A-33 Room No. 201 Sector 58 Noida, of which the applicant and her brother Hopson are Directors.
4.It has also been informed and is mentioned in the case diary that the aforesaid amount of Rs. 1,60,000/- has been returned to the informant under orders of the Court.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail is maintainable for the applicant in a cheating case involving IT Act offences where her brother, the co-director, has been granted bail and an amount in question returned.
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail on grounds of parity with the co-accused and absence of criminal history.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Kivikali
- respondent
State of U.P.
Coram
Subhash Vidyarthi
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · December
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/34716/2022
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court