Allowed

Babu Gulab Khan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Dec 2022BAIL/35540/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Courts granted bail to Babu Gulab Khan in a criminal trial involving cheating, forgery, and criminal breach of trust. The applicant, contract worker, claimed false implication based on a co-accused confession. The court released him on personal bond and sureties with strict conditions regarding attendance and conduct. Observations were confined to bail disposal.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties, subject to specific undertakings regarding court attendance and conduct.

Babu Gulab Khan Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35540 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Babu Gulab Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shivangi Bhargava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit on behalf of the State and the rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant in the Court today are taken on record.

¶6

Heard Ms. Shivangi Bhargava, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the entire material available on record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Babu Gulab Khan with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No. 0141 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 406 I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali, District-Rampur, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

On 9th July, 2022, the present first information report has been lodged against Mohd. Arif and one unknown person.

¶9

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant is not named in the first information report and his name has surfaced in the confessional statement of named co-accused Mohd. Arif, which has no evidentiary value as per Sections 25 and 26 of the Indian Evidence Act. The applicant is a only a worker on contract basis. Neither the applicant has committed any offence nor he has taken any illegal money by committing forgery as alleged by the prosecution. It is further argued that the main co-accused Mohd. Arif has already been enlarged on bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14th October, 2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 40124 of 2022. The case of the present applicant is on better footing to that of the aforesaid co-accused. As such the applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 12th July, 2022.

¶10

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release the accused, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

(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 him in accordance with law.

¶16

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶17

(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)

¶18

Order Date :- 7.12.2022 Sushil/-

¶19

Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.12.09 10:08:52 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Babu Gulab Khan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Gulab Khan 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

Mohd Haseen Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shahbaz Vs State of U.P.

Jaiveer Vs State of U.P.

Mustqeem Vs State of U.P.

Usman Vs State of U.P.

Anil Rai Vs State of U.P.