Dismissed

Mahesh Kushwaha v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Jul 2023ABAIL/7133/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-bench judgment anticipatory bail rejected the applicant's application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The court found that the gravity of allegations, involving forgery and misappropriation of public funds, negated the requirement showing no case for granting anticipatory bail.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. rejected; directed to move regular bail application before appropriate forum.

Mahesh Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:146529

¶2

Court No. - 71

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7133 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Mahesh Kushwaha Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Pandey,Nikil Pathak,Vijeta Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bal Ram Bind

¶5

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Learned counsel for the informant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶7

This Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 445 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 406, 468, 471, 120-B,504, 506 IPC, P.S. Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar during the pendency of investigation.

¶8

Allegation against the applicant is that he along with other co accused persons are said to have duped several persons and misappropriated a huge sum of public money.

¶9

It is submitted that in this case applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated by the police with ulterior motive. It is further submitted that there is no credible evidence to connect the applicant with the crime in question. The applicant is under apprehension of imminent arrest. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the trial.

¶10

Learned Additional Government Advocate, has opposed the prayer for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. It is further submitted that applicant along with other co accused persons are said to have

¶11

committed forgery and misappropriated public money to the extent of Rs. 5-6 Crores.

¶12

In the light of above, looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties as mentioned above, taking into consideration the role assigned to the applicant as per prosecution case, gravity and nature of accusation, this Court is of the view that no case for exercising its discretionary power under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is made out in favour of applicant.

¶13

Accordingly, this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is rejected. Applicant is directed to move regular bail application before the appropriate forum and if such application is given, the court below shall consider and disposed of the bail application expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶14

Order Date :- 24.7.2023 RavindraKSingh

¶15

Digitally signed by :- RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mahesh Kushwaha v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh Kushwaha v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Samsu @ Samsuddin and 4 Others Vs State of U.P.

Shashiprakash Tiwari Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Jitendra Kumar @ Jeetu Vs State of U.P.

Shivani Sonkar Vs State of U.P. and Another