Allowed

Tarsem v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Aug 2023BAIL/18611/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 read with 34 IPC, the Allahabad High Court released the applicant on bail. The court noted the FIR was lodged with delay, no material was recovered from the applicant, and a co-accused was already on bail.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Tarsem was released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:164690

¶2

Court No. - 77

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18611 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Tarsem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Srivastava,Ashutosh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.

¶6

Heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

The present first bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 523 of 2022 under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 read with 34 I.P.C. Police Station Sector -63, District Noida with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶8

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case due to malafide intentions. It is submitted that the F.I.R. has been lodged after delay of seven days of the incident without any explanation. It is next submitted that the applicant was not arrested at the spot and nothing incriminating has been recovered from his possession. It is further submitted that no statement of account of applicant is made part of the case diary. It is contended that co-

¶9

accused on identical footing, namely, Anuj Sachan, has been enlarged on bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.04.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11870 of 2023. Applicant is languishing in jail since 10.03.2023 having no criminal history and if he is granted the liberty of bail he will not misuse the same and he is ready to furnish his sufficient sureties, bonds and personal bonds.

¶10

On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the prayer of bail but could not controvert the aforesaid arguments as advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Considering the fact that the applicant was neither arrested at the spot nor any incriminating material has been recovered from his possession, no statement of account is made part of the case diary, delay in lodging in F.I.R. has not been explained by the prosecution, applicant is languishing in jail since 10.03.2023 having no criminal history, case is triable by Magistrate, coaccused having identical footing has been enlarged on bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, accusedapplicant is liable to be released on bail.

¶12

Let the applicant Tarsem be released on bail in the above case crime number and on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court

¶13

concerned with the following conditions :-

¶14

(i) 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.

¶15

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(iii) 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.

¶17

(iv) 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

¶18

trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and

¶19

proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

(v) The applicant shall also furnish an undertaking from the sureties that the properties (movable/immovable) which are the basis of accepting the surety, shall not be disposed of by them till the conclusion of trial.

¶21

(vi) The applicant shall also give an undertaking to the effect that he will not change his address without prior intimation to the trial court concerned.

¶22

(Renu Agarwal,J.)

¶23

Order Date :- 16.8.2023 Karan

¶24

Digitally signed by :- KUMAR KARAN RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Tarsem v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tarsem 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

Smt. Prema Devi Vs State of U.P.

Hasnain Vs State of U.P.

Kuldeep Goswami Vs State of U.P.

Ateeq Vs State of U.P.

Guddu @ Omkar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Aasif Jamal Vs State of U.P.