Nakul Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:3630

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1003 of 2022

Appellant :- Nakul Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home, Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Mohammad Afsar,Arshad Hafeez Khan,Dinesh Kr. Sharma,Kanchan Verma,Mohd. Nafees,Rakesh Kumar Tripathi,Ramendra Kumar Misra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Anjum Ara,Mohammad Irfan Siddiqui,Rahul Singh Rana

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the private respondent, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present appeal has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 12.04.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, (SC/ST Act), Lucknow in Bail Application No. 2392 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 236 of 2019 U/s 406, 420, 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C., Section 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(5-A) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Wazeerganj, District- Lucknow; for releasing appellant on bail in the aforesaid case crime.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that as per the prosecution case, appellant is witness of the sale deed in question which was executed by Satya Narayan in favour of private respondent and no alleged offense is made out against him. He further submits that appellant is in jail since 30.03.2022, he does not have any criminal antecedent, hence, he is entitled to be released on bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the private respondent vehemently opposes the prayer of appellant. They submit that there is no illegality in the order passed by learned trial court and involvement of appellant was also found. They do not dispute the fact that appellant is the only witness of the sale deed in question. They also do not dispute the fact that it is not a case that any forged document was prepared by appellant.

¶10

Learned counsel for the private respondent further submits that complainant was cheated by Satya Narayan with association of appellant and other persons. He does not dispute the fact that appellant is only witness of the said sale deed.

¶11

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the private respondent, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of appeal, impugned order as well as other relevant documents; it is evident that appellant is the witness of the sale deed executed by Satya Narayan in relation to the alleged property which was purchased by private respondent and there is no evidence against him. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Resultantly, in view of the above facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, hence, the appeal has substance and it is accordingly allowed and the impugned order dated 12.04.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, (SC/ST Act), Lucknow is hereby set aside.

¶13

Let the appellant- Nakul Verma involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:-

¶14

(1) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶15

(ii) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(iii) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the appellant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(iv) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

Office is directed to communicate this order to the trial court, forthwith.

¶19

Order Date :- 12.1.2024 Arpan

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Nakul Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nakul Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil Kumar Tyagi Vs State of U.P.

Rajjan Vs State of Up Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and another

Rahul Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Civil Secrett. Lko. and Another

Ram Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Harinath Alias Dhanai Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Amarjeet Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.