Allowed

Krishna Murari Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow

Allahabad HC6 Feb 2024/200/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the Allahabad High Court allowed bail for the applicant in a case involving cheating and forgery. The Court considered evidence of alleged payment and co-accused grants of bail, imposing conditions including payment of compensation, surrender timelines, and cooperation in investigation.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to conditions: payment of Rs. 20,000/- to informant or deposit in court; surrender before trial court within 20 days; cooperation in investigation and trial.

Krishna Murari Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:10936

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 200 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Krishna Murari Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Haroon Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including complete case diary and the investigation of this case is still in progress.

¶7

Heard Shri Mohd. Haroon, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Krishna Murari Pandey in Case Crime No. 186/2023, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 506 IPC, Police Station Alapur, District Ambedkar Nagar, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

¶9

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that it is a case of false implication. Rs. 40,000/- is stated to have been given to the applicant, however, there is no proof with regard to such payment. The alleged offences against the applicant are triable by the Magistrate criminal history of one case has adequately been explained in paragraph no. 16 of the anticipatory bail application, wherein the applicant has been granted bail by the Additional Sessions Court No.6, Lucknow, vide order dated 5.12.2023 passed in Bail Application No. 9861 of 2023. Identically placed co-accused person, namely, Varsha Upadhyay @ Varsha has been granted anticipatory bail while another identically placed co-accused person, namely, Shyamlal Maurya has been granted regular bail by the Coordinate Benches of this Court, vide orders dated 22.12.2023 and 9.11.2023, passed in CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3031 of 2023 and Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 13421 of 2023, respectively.

¶10

It is further submitted that the applicant would cooperate in

¶11

the investigation and would remain present before the Investigating Officer as and when his presence would be required and there is no apprehension that the accused-applicant after release on anticipatory bail, may flee from the process of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶12

Learned AGA, on the other hand opposes the prayer of anticipatory bail of the applicant by showing that the amount of Rs. 40,000/- has been transferred in the bank account of the applicant through U.P.I and this fact has been verified by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation, thus the applicant is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.

¶13

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it appears that identically placed coaccused person, namely, Varsha Upadhyay @ Varsha has been granted anticipatory bail while one of the co-accused person, namely, Shyamlal Maurya has been granted regular bail by the Coordinate Benches of this Court. Rs. 40,000/- are stated to have been transferred to the bank account of the applicant and the Investigating Officer appears to have verified this aspect of the matter, as is evident from the case diary. Criminal history of one case has been explained by the applicant.

¶14

Thus, having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra (2011) 1 SCC 694 as well as in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2020) 5 SCC 1 , Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Ors. v. State of Punjab MANU/SC/0215/1980 : 1980 (2) SCC 565 and in Nathu Singh Vs State of U.P. and Others, 2021(6) SCC 64, MANU/SC/0360/2021 , the liberty of the applicant may be protected subject to certain conditions/ restrictions.

¶15

In result the anticipatory bail application moved on behalf of the applicant- Krishna Murari Pandey is allowed and it is provided that in the event of arrest of the applicant, involved in the above noted case or on his surrender/ appearance before the trial court within 20 days from today i.e. on or before 26.02.2024, whichever is earlier, he shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶16

The applicant within 30 days from today shall pay Rs. 20,000/- and in case of refusal by the informant/ complainant he shall deposit this amount within the aforesaid period with the trial court and in this scenario the trial court shall issue ;a

¶17

notice tot he informant/ complainant of this case and on her appearance and identification shall release the amount of Rs. 20,000/- in her favour without taking surety and security.

¶18

2. The applicant if not arrested earlier, shall surrender before the trial court within 20 days from today i.e. on or before 26.02.2024 and will cooperate in the trial.

¶19

The applicant shall Cooperate in the investigation and will make himself available as and when required by the Investigating officer of the case, even for the recovery of any fact, if the case is directed to be further investigated.

¶20

The applicant shall not make any attempt to influence the prosecution witnesses and will also not commit any crime during his release on anticipatory bail.

¶21

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and especially when the prosecution witnesses are present in court.

¶22

The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶23

If in the opinion of the trial court default of any of the condition placed above is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and shall proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶24

It is clarified that all the observations contained in this order are only for disposal of this anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the proceedings before the trial court in any manner.

¶25

Order Date :- 6.2.2024 Muk

¶26

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

Krishna Murari Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Murari Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pankaj Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Rajesh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Umesh Kumar Gaur @ Umesh Gaur and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Raghav Ram Vs State of U.P Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Ajeet Kumar Gupta @ Ajeet Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Ajeet Kumar Gupta @ Ajeet Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.