Allowed

Bajrang Singh Shekhawat v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Aug 2023BAIL/24192/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a criminal bail application. The court granted bail to the applicant, noting that he has been in confinement for nearly nine months, no early trial conclusion is expected, and no reasonable apprehension of tampering or witness intimidation was established by the state.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is enlarged on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to appearance, no tampering with evidence, and no pressure on witnesses.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:159273

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24192 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Bajrang Singh Shekhawat Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Rejoinder affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 934 of 2020, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Ramgarh Tal, District Gorakhpur during the pendency of the trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant was a tenant in the house of the informant. The informant entered into an agreement with M/s. M.K. Construction Company. The proprietor of the said company was co-accused Mahesh Kumar Saini. The applicant was also working for the said company. The dispute is purely commercial in nature. The criminal proceedings have been instituted for the purposes of harassment. In the account of wife of the applicant only Rs.1,11,000/- has been transferred. It is contended that the said amount was taken as a loan by the informant from the applicant which was returned. There is no evidence at this stage to establish that Rs.49,00,000/- has been taken by the applicant. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in Paragraph-37 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 12.11.2022 and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶11

Having regard to the submissions made above and the fact that the applicant has remained confined for almost nine months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Let the applicant- Bajrang Singh Shekhawat, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he:

¶13

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶14

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

¶15

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶17

Order Date :- 8.8.2023 SKT/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Bajrang Singh Shekhawat v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bajrang Singh Shekhawat 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

Vijay @ Mulayam Vs State of U.P.

Narendra Singh @ Deepa Vs State of U.P.

Lauhar Vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra Pramadik Vs State of U.P.

Amir Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Raju @ Nemchand Vs State of U.P.