Allowed

Nitin v. State of U.P. though it Principal Secretary (Home)Lucknow

Allahabad HC15 Dec 2023BAIL/53735/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed bail to an applicant in an IPC cheating and extortion case. The court relied on the absence of the applicant from the FIR, lack of independent witnesses to alleged property recovery, and no criminal history to grant bail on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail via personal bond and two sureties of equal amount, subject to conditions regarding evidence protection, witness non-interaction, and trial attendance.

Nitin Vs State of U.P. though it Principal Secretary… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:237472

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53735 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Nitin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Though It Principal Secretary (Home)Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶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. 141 of 2023, under Sections 394, 411 I.P.C., Police StationPhugana, District- Muzaffarnagar during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 3.11.2023 and the first information report was lodged on 5.11.2023. The delay is fatal to the prosecution case. The applicant was arrested on 6.11.2023 along with two other coaccused and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The recovery of alleged motorcycle is false and planted. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The applicant does not have any criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 6.11.2023. In case he is enlarged 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 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. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for more than one month and 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 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.

¶11

Let the applicant, Nitin involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:

¶12

i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶13

ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness;

¶14

iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 15.12.2023 S.S.

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nitin v. State of U.P. though it Principal Secretary (Home)Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nitin v. State of U.P. though it Principal Secretary (Home)Lucknow

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

Sughad Singh Vs State of U.P.

Brijesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Raghuveer Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Lalit @ Kallu Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav Vs State of U.P.

Sheeba and Another Vs State of U.P.