Allowed

Sunit Pal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Nov 2022BAIL/48675/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application filed by Sunit Pal seeking bail in a fraud case involving IPC sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B. The High Court found it a fit case for bail considering co-accused release and pending dialogue on merits.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; Sunit Pal released on bail requiring personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific attendance and conduct conditions.

Sunit Pal Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 92

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48675 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sunit Pal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bindu Kumari,Prashant Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Prashant Sharma, learned counsel for the intervenor as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.161 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of IPC, Police Station- Dankaur, District- Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶7

As per the prosecution story, the applicant and other co-accused have committed fraud with the informant and sold his property to co-accused Satya Prakash by changing name in the Adhar Card and Pan Card.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. Further submission is that there is a civil dispute going on in between the parties and the applicant has not committed any forgery with the informant. It is also submitted that the informant and the applicant are real brothers and a dispute arose in between them with regard to sale of a property and the informant has implicated the applicant in the present case. It is further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant except the present case. It is further submitted that the co-accused Satya Dev Prasad and Satish Jha have already been enlarged on bail by another Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 9.09.2022 and 27.9.2022, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Applications No.38773 of 2022 and 39449 of 2022 respectively. Copies of the bail orders have been brought on record as annexure 6 to the bail application. Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on account of parity. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, he may flee from

¶9

the course of law or may, otherwise, misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is in jail since 20.07.2022, and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is very bleak.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail, but he has not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

From perusal of the record, it appears that the informant and the applicant are real brothers and the applicant is the seller of the property. There is a civil dispute in between the parties.

¶12

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 keeping in mind that co-accused has already been released on bail by this Court and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶13

Let applicant- Sunit Pal, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(iii) In case, the applicant misuse 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 fail 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.

¶17

(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

¶18

liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 14.11.2022 Shiv

¶21

Digitally signed by SHIV KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2022.11.14 17:15:15 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sunit Pal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunit Pal 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nadeem @ Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Nafees Vs State of U.P.

Vadil Hasan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Latif Ansari Vs State of U.P.

Nasir Vs State of U.P.

Salman Vs State of U.P.