Allowed

Om Prakash Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC3 Jan 2024/14461/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Bail Application allowed. The High Court at Lucknow granted bail to the applicant, Om Prakash Verma, accused under multiple sections of IPC. The court noted his 52-cases bail history and that a co-director was bailed in a coordinate bench.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to conditions including not leaving the country and not tampering

Om Prakash Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:714

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14461 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Om Prakash Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed by the State and supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant as well as the bunch of bail orders passed in favour of the accused- applicant with regard to the cases shown as criminal history of the applicant are taken on record.

¶7

Heard Shri Ajeet Kumar, learned counsel for the accused/applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Om Prakash Verma for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 67/2022, under Sections 419, 420, 409, 109 IPC, Police Station Baddupur, District Barabanki, during trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the accused-applicant has been named in this case as well as in the other criminal cases lodged against him only on account of the fact that he is Director of the Life Long Care Multi State Agro Cooperative Society Ltd., which was indulged into real estate business and in all the cases it is alleged that the aggrieved persons have made some investment in the company in order to get enhanced maturity amount and a piece of land. However, matured money could not be paid to the aggrieved persons as they failed to deposit all the instalments for getting maturity amount.

¶10

It is further submitted that all the cases lodged against the applicant are identical in nature and out of 52 criminal cases shown as the criminal history of the applicant in 38 cases he has been granted bail.

¶11

It is also submitted that the applicant is in jail in this case since 11.07.2022 and there is no apprehension that the accusedapplicant after release on bail, may flee from the process of law

¶12

or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶13

It is also submitted that identically placed co-accused, person, namely, Sangam Verma @ Sangam Kumar Verma has been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 15.12.2023 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 14801 of 2023 and he was also a Director of the Company.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that the applicant is accused of committing an heinous offence and having regard to his long criminal history, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶15

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is reflected that the applicant was director of Company, who allegedly failed to pay back the matured amount to the depositors and First Information Report has been lodged against the applicant and other accused persons. It is submitted that out of 52 identical criminal cases shown as criminal history against the applicant, has been granted bail in 38 cases. Identically placed co-accused person, namely, Sangam Verma @ Sangam Kumar Verma, who is also shown as Director in the Company, has also been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court. The applicant is detained in prison in this case since 11.7.2022 and his presence may be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions.

¶16

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶17

Let the applicant- Om Prakash Verm a involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶18

(i) The applicant without prior permission of the trial court shall not leave the country.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶24

Observations made herein-above are only for the purpose of disposal of bail application and the same shall not have any bearing on the trial of the case.

¶25

Order Date :- 3.1.2024 Muk

¶26

Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Om Prakash Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Prakash Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Basheer Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Manish Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Munna Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Guddu Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Balwant Singh Rautela Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

Deshraj and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko.