Allowed

Naresh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 Nov 2023BAIL/48181/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the High Court granted bail to the applicant charged with cheating and forgery offenses. The court noted the applicant was a bona fide purchaser who paid stamp duty, had no criminal history, and no evidence suggested he would tamper with witnesses or delay the trial.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to appearing on due dates and not tampering with evidence or witnesses.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:226453

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48181 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Naresh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Chandra Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ruchita Jain,Ruksana

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Ruchita Jain, counsel for the informant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State-opposite party.

¶7

The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 273 of 2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of I.P.C., Police Station- Vrindawan, District- Mathura, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is bonafide purchaser of the property in dispute. The applicant has paid the stamp duty worth Rs. 4,18,500/- for execution of the sale deed. The applicant himself has been duped. The property is still in possession of the informant. The applicant is in jail since 30.09.2023, having no criminal history and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

Learned AGA and counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶10

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that applicant had paid the stamp duty worth Rs. 4,18,500/- for execution of the sale deed. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence against the applicant. Further, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for almost two 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

¶11

witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Let the applicant Naresh , involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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 :- 30.11.2023 Sachin Mishra

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Naresh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naresh 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

Lekhpal Vs State of Up through Princi. Secre. Home Gov. Of Up at and 3ors

Sanoj Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Tabrez Vs State of U.P.

Avadhesh Kumar Yadav @ Pintu Vs State of U.P.

Habeeb Vs State of U.P.

Anuj Vs State of U.P.