Allowed

Vijay v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Mar 2022BAIL/5515/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allowed a bail application for an applicant named Vijay accused of offences including cheating, forgery, and misuse of Aadhar under the IPC, Aadhaar Act, and IT Act. The court granted bail citing that co-accused persons had already been enlarged on bail and the applicant's case stands on similar footing.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5515 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Vijay Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rishabh Kumar Pandey,Santosh Kumar Upadhyay,Vinod Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶5

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

¶6

It is submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of letter issued by Commissioner, Food & Supply Department. An F.I.R. was lodged against several persons with allegation that on the basis of fabricated Aadhar Cards food grain was received by the people those were not entitled for it on the place of the people those were entitled for receiving the same from the fair price shop. Applicant was not named in the F.I.R. His name was brought into light on the basis of statement made by co-accused Raj Kumar & Shahanwaz who have been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.39907 of 2020 & 44995 of 2020 vide orders dated 18.01.2021 & 05.02.2021. The case of this applicant stands on similar footing to that of co-accused. Applicant is languishing in jail since 05.01.2021 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the fact that co-accused persons have already been granted bail and the case of the present applicant is on similar footing and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶9

Let the applicant Vijay involved in Case Crime No.581 of 2018, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. & Section 39 AADHAR Card Act, 2016 & Section 66(C) I.T. Act & Section 3/7 E.C. Act, Police Station T.P. Nagar, District Meerut, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of

¶10

the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶11

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶12

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶13

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

¶14

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶15

The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 23.3.2022 Ashok Gupta

¶18

Digitally signed by ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA Date: 2022.03.29 10:46:34 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vijay v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay 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

Safeeq @ Sarik Vs State of U.P.

Arjun Vs State of U.P.

Rajeev Vs State of U.P.

Jisan Vs State of U.P.

Mritunjay Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of Up.