Allowed

Avinash Bajpai Alias Akash Bajpai v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Mar 2022BAIL/6136/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to Avinash Bajpai Alias Akash Bajpai in a non-bailable offence involving cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy. The court observed substance in the argument that the FIR was based on documents seized during a separate investigation.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail by furnishing a personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions regarding tampering with evidence and committing new crimes.

Avinash Bajpai Alias Akash Bajpai Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6136 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Avinash Bajpai Alias Akash Bajpai Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ved Prakash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This bail application has been moved on behalf of the accused-applicant/ Avinash Bajpai Alias Akash Bajpai for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 277 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Shahjahanpur, during pendency of trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case only on account of his criminal history.

¶8

It is further submitted that the prosecution story as is surfaced from the averments made in the first information report is to the tune that on 11.06.2021, Sub-Inspector Lalit Kumar along with other police personnels had raided the house of the instant applicant as accused in connection with Case Crime No. 271 of 2021, under Sections 306, 305, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 10/22 U.P. Regulation of Money Lending Act, 1976, registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Shahjahanpur and during the course of investigation the premise of applicant was searched, different kinds of documents were seized and on the basis of this search and material recovered there from, the instant FIR has been registered.

¶9

Highlighting the above factual matrix, it is vehemently submitted that the Investigating Officer of Case Crime No.271 of 2021 has acted in an unusual manner, as if any raid or search was conducted in furtherance of the earlier FIR registered as Case Crime No. 271 of 2021, the material, even if it was incriminatory, should have been the part and parcel of the investigation of Case Crime No. 271 of 2021 and there was neither any necessity nor any occasion for the informant to have registered a separate criminal case for the same. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet after investigation has already been filed under Sections 420, 467, 468 I.P.C. and this itself shows that the Investigating Officer has not conducted the investigation in a fair manner. It is further submitted that it is not evident and clear from the content of the FIR as to how the penal provisions invoked against the applicant are attracted. Apart from this case two other cases are shown as the criminal history of the applicant. One of the case pertaining to Gangster Act has been registered after the instant FIR and in the case pertaining to Case Crime No. 271 of 2021 the bail application has

¶10

been heard by a Coordinate Bench of this Court and the order is awaited. Applicant is languishing in jail in this case since 09.06.2021 and there is no likelihood that the accused-applicant after release on bail may flee from the process of law or will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer for bail on the ground that the applicant is an accused of heinous offence and therefore he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is reflected from the record that in connection with the investigation of Case Crime No. 271 of 2021 the premise of the applicant was raided and searched and certain documents of different kinds were recovered and on the basis of those documents the instant FIR has been registered. It is vehemently submitted that the seizure of documents was in connection with Case Crime No. 271 of 2021 and there was no requirement to lodged another FIR. I find substance in the submission of learned counsel for the applicant, only for releasing the applicant on bail.

¶13

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is thus allowed.

¶14

Let the accused-applicant/ Avinash Bajpai Alias Akash Bajpai involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

Order Date :- 23.3.2022 Abhishek Singh

¶20

Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SINGH Date: 2022.03.24 17:18:40 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Avinash Bajpai Alias Akash Bajpai v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avinash Bajpai Alias Akash Bajpai 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

Dhanji Turaha Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Nitin Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dhruv Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Meenu Sain Vs State of U.P.

Irfan Vs State of U.P.

Naseema and Another Vs State of U.P.