Allowed

Naseem v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Nov 2023BAIL/45315/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal bail application seeks release on bail for the applicant charged with cheating, forgery, and fraud. The court noted the implication was based solely on a bail-granted co-accused's statement with no recovered evidence. Finding no substantive case, no criminal history, and no risk to trial integrity, the court allowed bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount subject to standard conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:211442

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45315 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Naseem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhiraj Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party.

¶7

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. 239 of 2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and 3(2) Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, Police Station Gangoh, District Saharanpur during the pendency of the trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant was implicated on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Sadik. The said statement, insofar as it implicates the applicant, is unreliable. No recovery of forged documents has been made from the applicant. The applicant is a Computer Operator at a shop run by co-accused Shiv Kumar. The applicant has no concern with the preparation of forged documents. It is next contended that coaccused Sadik has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 44648 of 2023, Sadik v. State of U.P., vide order dated 31.10.2023. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 27.08.2023 having no criminal history and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

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

¶10

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant has been implicated on the basis of confessional statement of coaccused Sadik, who has been granted bail by this Court. At present there is no substantive evidence against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has

¶11

remained confined for almost two months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and 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, therefore, 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- Naseem, 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 :- 2.11.2023 SKT/-

¶18

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

Naseem v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naseem 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

Suresh Vs State of U.P.

Intezar Vs State of U.P.

Faheem Vs State of U.P.

Rajjan Gupta and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Kumar @ Akash Vs State of U.P.