Allowed

Chandralok v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Jun 2022BAIL/4336/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Chandralok, a Canara Bank official, charged with cheating and forgery. The court found merit in the submission that the applicant was falsely implicated and has no prior criminal history, granting release on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with conditions not to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses.

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

¶1

Court No. - 43

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4336 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Chandralok Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ali Jamal Khan,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manish Kumar Tripathi

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 117 of 2021 at Police Station Kotwali Katra, District Mirzapur under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471, 120-B IPC. The applicant is in jail since 13.12.2021.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Mirzapur, on 22.12.2021.

¶7

Shri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ali Jamal Khan, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant is a senior official working in the Canara Bank where the locker account was existing. The deceased account holder had accessed the locker alongwith his grand daughter just prior to his death. The account holder had taken out jewellery items. The applicant had adhered to the operating procedures of the bank strictly in regard to the operation of the locker. The mismatch of the signatures of the account holder which was affixed in the year 2020 with the specimen signature of the year

¶8

1990 was on account of the failing health condition of the account holder. He suffered from Parkinson's disease and bipolar disorder. The applicant was exposed to departmental action on the same charges and he had been exonerated therein. The principal offender who was the son of the account holder has been enlarged on bail by this Court on 25.02.2022 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2133 of 2022. The case of the applicant stands on a better footing. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

¶9

Shri I.P. Srivastava, learned A.G.A for the State and Sri Manish Tiwary, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Manish Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶10

I see merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶11

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant- Chandralok be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a

¶13

personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶16

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶19

Order Date :- 1.6.2022 Pravin

¶20

Digitally signed by PRAVIN VERMA Date: 2022.06.03 11:15:51 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chandralok v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandralok 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

Kamlesh Kumar Ram Vs State of U.P.

Anant Pal@ Anant Ram@ Antu Vs State of U.P.

Arjun Vs State of U.P.

Lakshya Tawar Vs State of U.P.

Manak Mimoh Bharti Vs State of U.P.

Washim Khan @ Shahid Khan Vs State of U.P.