Allowed

Gyan Chand Vishwakarma v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Feb 2023BAIL/59121/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application allowed. The court granted bail to the applicant accused of cheating and forgery, noting that the Investigating Officer failed to verify signatures on the alleged fake receipt or record statements of bank employees, and the applicant's claim of being in Surat at the relevant time was not disputed by the State.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Gyan Chand Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 59121 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Gyan Chand Vishwakarma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Chaturvedi,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Heard Sri I.K.Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate, assited by of Sri Faizan Ahman,, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA, for the State.

¶6

The instant bail application has been moved on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.120 of 2021, under Sections 120B, 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506, Police Station Baberu, District Banda during pendency of the trial.

¶7

According to the prosecution case, applicant was the proprietor of the customer care centre of State Bank of India and he received Rs.68762/- from the informant for FD but by playing fraud he duped the entire money handed over to him.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that entire allegation made against the applicant is totally false and baseless and applicant was authorized to run a service centre on behalf of the State Bank of India but his contract with the Bank had expired on 28.2.2018 and thereafter in the month of May, 2018 he went to Surat along with his family members and at the time of alleged receiving the money, i.e., on 22.6.2018 he did not run the service centre and at that time he was in Surat and, therefore, he cannot be responsible for any forgery committed against the informant.

¶9

He next submits that this fact has been averred by the applicant in paragraphs 22 and 23 to the affidavit filed in support of the

¶10

present bail application. He further submits that informant during investigation provided a receipt of Rs.68762/- alleged to have been given to him on 22.6.2018 and on the receipt there was signature of authorized signatory but during investigation Investigating Officer did not verify any signature and no opinion of expert was taken in this regard and this fact has also averred by applicant in paragraph 27 to the affidavit filed in support of the present bail application. He further submits that on the basis of verbal allegation without verifying the FD receipt and deposit slip charge sheet has been filed and Investigating Officer even during investigation did not record the statement of any Bank Employee including the Bank Manager.

¶11

He next submits that applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 21.9.2022.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant was the proprietor of the Customer Service Centre of the State Bank of India and there is specific allegation that after receiving Rs. 68762/- from the informant, he misappropriated the money and also provided him a fake fixed deposit receipt but learned AGA could not dispute the fact that during investigation the signature of the alleged fixed deposit receipt could not be verified by Investigating Officer and even he did not take any opinion of the expert and even Investigating Officer did not record statement of any Bank Employee including the Bank Manager.

¶13

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶14

Although there is allegation that applicant being manager/proprietor of customer service centre of State Bank of India duped the informant after receiving Rs.68762/-and did not

¶15

deposit the amount in the Bank and also issued fake fixed deposit receipt but applicant has made specific averment in paragraphs 22 and 23 to the affidavit filed in support of the present bail application that his contract had already expired in the month of February 2018 and in May 2018 he had gone to Surat along with his family members and as per instructions received by learned AGA the averment made in paragraphs 22 and 23 to the affidavit filed in support of the instant bail application could not be denied. Further, although informant provided the receipt of fixed deposit which is alleged to have been given by applicant to the informant but the Investigating Officer did not take any opinion of hand writing expert in this regard and during investigation Investigating Officer also did not even record the statement of any Bank Employee including the Bank Manager.

¶16

Applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 21.9.2022.

¶17

Therefore, from the discussions made above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶19

Let the applicant- Gyan Chand Vishwakarma be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶21

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the

¶22

evidence.

¶23

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and antisocial activity.

¶24

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶25

Order Date :- 8.2.2023 SKM

¶26

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

Gyan Chand Vishwakarma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gyan Chand Vishwakarma 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

Iqbal Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Ram Nath Mishra @ Ramnath Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Kundan Singh @ Anshuman Singh Vs State of U.P.

Dabeer Khan Vs State of U.P.

Shami Akhtar Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P.