Allowed

Vishnu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Jul 2022BAIL/5069/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted bail to the applicant who was illegally implicated in a case involving cheating and forgery charges. The applicant claimed to have been cheated while purchasing property and was falsely implicated. Bail was allowed subject to stringent conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to personal bond and two sureties with conditions against tampering with evidence, seeking adjournments, and absence of court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5069 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Vishnu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi,Amit Daga,Rohit Shukla

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,D.M.Tripathi

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri D. M. Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

There is allegation against the applicant that he is beneficiary and fraudulently sale deed executed by one co-accused, Sonu, acting as power attorney holder of informant.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has purchased the property in dispute by means of registered sale deed for valuable consideration. He himself was cheated and falsely implicated in this case. Applicant is in jail since 18.12.2021.

¶9

On the other hand learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted herein above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant, Vishnu , involved in Case Crime No.0171 of 2020, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 419, 120-B IPC, Police Station Refinery, District- Mathura be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶13

(ii) 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.

¶14

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order

¶16

to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants 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

(v) 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 him in accordance with law.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

¶19

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶20

Order Date :- 21.7.2022 SS

¶21

Digitally signed by SURENDAR SINGH NARANG Date: 2022.07.22 17:48:44 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vishnu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishnu 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

Manish Goenka and Another Vs State of Up.

Manvendra Vs State of U.P.

Gopal Alias Ramgopal and Another Vs State of U.P.

Guddu Vs State of U.P.

Sumit Vs State of U.P.

Anoop @ Veer and Another Vs State of U.P.