This is a brief order rejecting a bail application. The court rejected bail citing the heinous nature of the offences (cheating, forgery, cheque fraud), the likelihood of tampering with evidence, and the probability of the accused fleeing from justice.
Bail Application rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37428 of 2021
Applicant :- Islam Husain Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Waseem Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard over bail application moved by accused-applicant, Islam Husain, in Case Crime No. 208 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Ganj, District Rampur.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accusedapplicant is innocent; he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number because of enmity and is languishing in jail since 08.06.2021; he is of no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence in case of release on bail; even after specific direction of this Court, neither alleged deposit of Rs. 02 lakhs by paytm nor by way of his account has been paid; no such statement of alleged payment was there; applicant is of no concern with the occurrence. Hence, bail has been prayed for.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed with this contention that four cheques in the tune of Rs. 3,80,000/- said to be issued by Dr. Bheemrao Ambedkar Jan Kalyan Sewa Samiti for providing assistance for marriage and Rojgar Kalyan Sewa Samiti and issued by Chief Minister office with four letters of Syndicate Bank, Rampur with specific details of cheques issued in the name of Kaynat, Rakiba, Rubi, Aashifa; though cheques were said to be result of fraud committed by applicant, who got himself introduced and did formalities for getting application form fulfilled etc. by those girls and in lieu of that, Rs. 02 lakhs by paytm in the bank account through mobile no. 9927527829 by applicant were got deposited to those four girls, who were victim of this offence, and had identified accused applicant, it has been determined in FIR itself, hence it is a fraud by applicant by deceiving those innocent victims and usurping money to the tune of Rs. 02 lakhs and issued fraudulent cheques with fraudulent letters; there is every likelihood of tempering with evidence or fleeing from course of justice, in case of release on bail.
Having heard learned counsel for both sides and gone through materials on record, it is apparent that in FIR itself, those four
victim had identified accused applicant for getting these formalities fulfilled under fraudulent assurance and ensuring for sending of four fraudulent cheques, usurping of money of Rs. 02 lakhs, has been said by them; it has been said to be made through paytm, hence it is financial white collared offence of heinous category.
Looking to the heinousness of offence, likelihood of tampering with evidence in case of release on bail as well as likelihood of fleeing from course of justice, but without commenting on merits of the case, there appears to be no ground for bail.
Accordingly, this Bail Application stands rejected.
Order Date :- 19.1.2022 Dhirendra/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving cheating, forgery, and dishonour of cheques.
Whether the likelihood of fleeing from the course of justice and tampering with evidence warrants rejection of bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Islam Husain
State of U.P.
Ram Krishna Gautam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
