Allowed

Dharampal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 Jan 2023BAIL/58072/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to applicant Dharampal in a cheating case involving cheque dishonour and money laundering offences. The applicant was released on personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions, citing the similar bail granted to a co-accused and the non-conclusion of the trial.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties on conditions to avoid tampering with evidence and cooperate in trial.

Dharampal Vs State of U.P. — Money Laundering | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 58072 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Dharampal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Dharampal with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.180 of 2020, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471/34, 406, 120-B I.P.C., & under section 3/ 4/5/6 of Prize Cheats and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, P.S. Bahadurgarh, District Hapur during pendency of trial.

¶7

Prosecution case is that informant on 21.10.2018 invested Rs.10 lacs in Company namely M/s Niftech Global Pvt. Ltd. On advise of co-accused Sanjeev Chauhan that on the investment in the company, he would get double amount in 18 months and he gave a cheque of Rs.10 lacs in the name of Company to coaccused Sanjeev Chauhan but after 18 months informant got information that co-accused person has closed their office and ran away from their homes. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Though applicant was Director of the company but amount has been misappropriated by the company and company has not made accused in the present case. Applicant has been implicated in similar type of 35 cases. He next argued that identically placed co-accused, Sanjeev Chauhan has been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 8.10.2020. He further submits that since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future. Criminal history against the applicants has been explained in supplementary affidavit. They are languishing in jail since 22.10.2022 and in case he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and co-operate in trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicants but could not dispute the facts narrated by counsel for the applicants.

¶9

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 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.

¶10

Let the applicant, Dharampal, who is involved in 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 following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶12

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶13

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶14

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶15

Order Date :- 30.1.2023 SKD

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dharampal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharampal 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

Chandni and Another Vs State of U P and 4 Others

Ankit Agarwal Vs State of U.P.

Yogendra Kumar Tiwari Vs State of U.P.

Satish Verma Vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Zeeshan Vs State of U.P.