In a bail application under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506 IPC, the Allahabad High Court granted bail, noting the absence of bank evidence and other material proof of the alleged cheque fraud.
The applicant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of appearance and non-interference.
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. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11199 of 2023
Applicant :- Chetan Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Mishra,Devendra Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajesh Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
Heard Sri Arvind Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and Dr. S.B.Maurya, learned AGA-I, for the State.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.245 of 2020, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467,468, 471 and 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandsahar during pendency of the trial.
FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and two others and two unknown persons and according to the FIR applicant and two other named accused persons including his wife duped the informant under the pretext to provide them a Fortuner Car which is alleged to have been received by them through Bank auction and they obtained total Rs.11,85,000/from the informant.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that entire allegation against the applicant is totally false and baseless and even the story narrated by the informant in the FIR appears to be quite improbable. According to him, he on different dates in different year provided total Rs.11,85,000/- to the applicant and other coaccused persons but admittedly not even a single money was transferred in the account of applicant although it is alleged that Rs.2,00,000/- were transferred in the account of Mrs. Madhu Chaudhary, his wife. He further submits that even as per FIR co-accused Kusum Batra provided a cheque of Rs.9,50,000/- to
the informant with regard to entire money which all the accused persons alleged to have been received from the informant but the same was dishonoured and therefore, it appears that it is not the case of fraud and cheating but it is a case of dispute of some amount.
He further submits that except bald and verbal allegation there is no other evidence against the applicant which can show that applicant ever received any money from the informant.
He next submits that applicant is although having criminal history of five other cases but his criminal history has been explained in paragraphs 19 onwards to the affidavit filed in support of the present bail application and in the present matter he is in jail since 27.1.2023 and all the offences are triable by Magistrate First Class.
Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant along with his wife and other coaccused persons duped the informant and on the basis of false and frivolous promise received total Rs. 11,85,000/- from him and the alleged Fortuner Car was never transferred in the name of accused persons and the document provided by them with regard to auction of Fortuner Car was fake and forged one and applicant is having criminal history of five other cases of similar nature
Learned counsel for the informant further submits that the FIR of the present case was lodged on 21.3.2020 but applicant could only be arrested on 27.12.2022, i.e., after about more than two and half years and this fact clearly suggests that applicant was absconder.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
Although there is allegation that applicant along with his wife and one another duped the informant and received total Rs.11,85,000/- from her and he is also having criminal history of five other cases of similar nature and he could only be arrested after two and half years but from the record it appears that not even a single money was transferred in the account of applicant and there is no evidence against him except bald and verbal allegation that he received money from the informant. Further co-accused Kusham Batra also provided a cheque of Rs. 9,50,000/- to the informant with regard to present dispute which was dishonoured and applicant applied for anticipatory bail but during its pendency, he was arrested and in the present matter he is in jail since 27.12.2022 and all the offences are triable by Magistrate First Class, therefore, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant-Chetan Chaudhary be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and antisocial activity.
In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution
will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 6.4.2023 SKM
Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail considering the lack of evidence proving he received the alleged money and the nature of offences being triable by Magistrate First Class.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Chetan Chaudhary
State of U.P.
Sameer Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
