Allowed

Ashish Kumar Niranjan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Oct 2022BAIL/39170/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the applicant who was in jail since September 2020 for cheating and criminal breach of trust. The applicant argued false implication and lack of trial conclusion. The High Court found it fit to grant bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Let the applicant be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, subject to standard conditions.

Ashish Kumar Niranjan Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 92

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39170 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Niranjan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Lakshman Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant, Ashish Kumar Niranjan, who is involved in Case Crime No.246 of 2020, under Sections 420, 406, 504 I.P.C. P.S.Kotwali Konch, District Jalaun and is in jail since 03.09.2020, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶7

As per prosecution story, applicant along with two other coaccused asked informant to invest the money and assured him that they will get better interest, the informant deposited Rs.2 Lacs in Jeevan Bharti Development India Ltd/Jeevan Sulabh Multi State Housing Cooperative Society Ltd, certificate in this regard was also handed over by co-accused Anup Rathor and when the amount will be returned back then they told him that the aforesaid company has fled away.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The offences are punishable with less than seven years of punishment and are exclusively triable by the Magistrate. It has been further argued that on similar set of facts, various cases have been lodged against the applicant and in some of them, he has been enlarged on bail. Moreover, there is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future. It is further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 03.09.2020, and in case of being released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶9

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations,

¶11

arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be fit case for granting bail.

¶12

In view of the above, let the applicant be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶13

The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶14

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶15

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶16

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before he is accepted.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶18

Order Date :- 13.10.2022 A.N. Mishra

¶19

Digitally signed by AMARNATH MISHRA Date: 2022.10.13 16:34:00 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ashish Kumar Niranjan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashish Kumar Niranjan 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

Neetu @ Sammy Dhimar Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Kumar Maurya Vs State of U.P.

Anirruddh @ Kanha Vs State of U.P.

Munendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Abrar Vs State of U.P.

Vikas Rastogi Vs State of U.P.