Allowed

Arun Kumar Raghav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2023BAIL/49085/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application involves an applicant accused of cheating and forgery marshalling materials. The court found he was falsely implicated, not in FIR and had no financial involvement. The court granted bail on bond terms finding no tampering risk.

What did the court decide?

Order to release the applicant on bail furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each subject to conditions of appearance and non-interference.

Arun Kumar Raghav Vs State of U.P. — Money Laundering | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:228965

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49085 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Arun Kumar Raghav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶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. 80 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Gyanpur, District Bhadohi, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused Parmatmadeen Yadav in police custody. The said statement insofar as it implicates the applicant is unreliable. No amount has been transferred in the account of the applicant. The applicant is not a beneficiary of the illicit transaction. The money was credited in the account of one Virendra Bahadur Singh. The co-accused Parmatmadeen Yadav has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 12.10.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41315 of 2023. The applicant is in jail since 04.07.2023 having no criminal history and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

Learned AGA has 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 the applicant was not named in the first information report. The name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused Parmatmadeen Yadav in police custody. No amount has been transferred in the account of the applicant. The applicant is not a beneficiary of the illicit transaction. The co-accused Parmatmadeen has been granted bail by this Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The

¶11

applicant has remained confined for five 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 Arun Kumar Raghav, 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 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 :- 4.12.2023 Lbm/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arun Kumar Raghav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Kumar Raghav 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

Prabhu Nath Maurya Vs State of U.P.

Panchu Vs State of U.P.

Bhagwat Patel Vs State of U.P.

Mallaha Vs State of U.P.

Imran Vs State of U.P.

Shishupal @ Pandit Vs State of U.P.