The court granted bail to the applicant in a cheating and forgery case, relying on larger constitutional mandates without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.
The applicant is released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with strict conditions regarding court attendance and evidence tampering.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 604 of 2022
Applicant :- Pankaj Bahal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through Secretary Home At Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Kumar,Anurag Pathak,Harshit Pathak,Manoj Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Pankaj Bahal, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 426 of 2020, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Expressway, DistrictGautam Buddh Nagar, during pendency of trial.
There is allegation in the first information report that the land in dispute which was fraudulently transferred by co-accused, Sumit Garg in favour of the informant was purchased from the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that except the aforesaid allegation, there is no allegations against the applicant. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Coaccused, Sumit Garg, has been granted bail by this Court by order dated 20.12.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 37940 of 2021. The applicant is languishing in jail since 01.09.2020. He has no prior criminal history. Subsequently, he was implicated in one case. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre-trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and without expressing any opinion on the merits
of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime 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 with the following conditions that :-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(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.
(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.
(iv) In case the applicant misuses 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 fails 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.
(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.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 5.8.2022 KS
Digitally signed by KISHAN SINHA Date: 2022.08.10 09:54:55 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an applicant falsely implicated in a cheating and forgery case should be released on bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & AnotherReferred¶10
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021
10 provisions across 3 enactments
Pankaj Bahal
State Of U.P. Through Secretary Home At Lucknow
Siddharth
J
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
