Allowed

Suresh Kashyap @ Suresh Kumar Kashyap v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 May 2023BAIL/54435/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal miscellaneous bail application was allowed by the Court. The applicant, charged with offenses under Sections 406, 419, 420, and 120-B of the IPC, claimed false implication and absence of overt acts. The court, noting uncertainty regarding trial conclusion and lack of prima facie evidence of fraud, granted bail subject to conditions and directed expeditious trial within six months.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two heavy sureties, conditioned against tampering with evidence and misusing liberty; trial directed to conclude within six months.

Suresh Kashyap @ Suresh Kumar Kashyap Vs… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:118796

¶2

Court No. - 86

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 54435 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Suresh Kashyap @ Suresh Kumar Kashyap Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kanhaiya Lal,Mohammed Iftekhar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Mithilesh Kumar, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶7

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that a concocted and false story has been set up by the prosecution whereas the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that applicant has not committed fraud or cheating with the informant. It is established from the F.I.R. version itself that no specific amount has been disclosed by the informant, which was withdrawn by applicant and there is no material evidence produced by the prosecution in this regard. It is further submitted that applicant was neither the agent nor the employee of the alleged company and he also not contacted any person to open the account in the said finance company nor he collected any amount from any person. It is further submitted that ingredients of offences are absent and entire prosecution story is based on false and frivolous allegations. It is further submitted that trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 07.09.2022 and he has no criminal history.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submits that prima facie offence against the accused

¶9

applicant is made out and in case applicant is release on bail, he will misuse the liberty of bail, but, he could not disputed the aforesaid facts.

¶10

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused, looking to the uncertainty in conclusion of trial, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Suresh Kashyap involved in Case Crime No. 548 of 2022, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Nawabganj , District Prayagraj be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two heavy sureties (one should be of family member) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.

¶12

(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

(ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶15

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶17

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.

¶18

Order Date :- 24.5.2023

¶19

Bhanu

¶20

Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Suresh Kashyap @ Suresh Kumar Kashyap v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Kashyap @ Suresh Kumar Kashyap 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sachin Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Verma Vs State of U.P.

Indra Jeet Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Awadhesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Manna Pasi Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P.