Allowed

Ratnesh Bharti v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Sept 2022BAIL/39992/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge bail application filed in a cheating case involving forgery. The court issued bail to the applicant subject to various conditions including personal bonds, undertaking against delay, and presence at trial stages.

What did the court decide?

Application for bail allowed; applicant released on personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions of presence and undertaking against delay.

Ratnesh Bharti Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 92

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39992 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ratnesh Bharti Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Sharma,Surendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶6

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.24 of 2021 at Police StationCyber Crime, District- Prayagraj, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 468, 471, 34 I.P.C. and Section 66/66-C, 66-D of I.T. Act.

¶7

As per version of the FIR, Rs.1,50,000/- has been cheated from the informant/complainant by committing forgery.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case due to ulterior motive. The applicant is not named in the FIR. Applicant is neither owner nor employee and even not the beneficiary of the said Company i.e. Easyday Franchise.Com, in which the alleged amount has been transferred by the informant on the behest of co-accused Rakesh Kumar Gosara. He further submits that applicant has no concern with the co-accused Rakesh Kumar Goshara. He further submits that applicant has criminal history of one case, which he has satisfactorily explained in para 21 of the bail application, in which he has already been granted bail by the court concerned. He does not have any criminal history except the aforesaid cases and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 13.05.2022.

¶9

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 accused-applicant.

¶10

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 without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it

¶11

to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶12

Let applicant, namely, Ratnesh Bharti, 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:-

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 15.9.2022 Ashutosh

¶19

Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH SINGH Date: 2022.09.16 11:13:03 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ratnesh Bharti v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ratnesh Bharti 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

Afzal @ Afzal Husain Usmani Vs State of U.P and Another

Ajay Tyagi Vs State of U P and 5 Others

Vaseem and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Badal Vs State of U.P.

Rishu Vs State of U.P.

Roop Kishor Vs State of U.P.