Dismissed

Devendra Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2024/2269/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application under cheating and forgery charges, the High Court rejected the plea after noting the applicant's failure to file a supplementary affidavit with bank statements as directed, leading to a conclusion that his assertions regarding payment were false.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected. Applicant remains in custody.

Devendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:48919

¶2

Court No. - 31

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2269 of 2023 Applicant :- Devendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko.

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Naresh Yadav,Parashu Ram Kanaujia,Vineet Kumar Chaurasia

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Shrawan Kumar Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Parashu Ram Kanaujia, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Gyanendra Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.

¶8

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.190 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467 and 468 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Nagram, District Lucknow.

¶9

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 21.09.2021 against three persons, including the applicant stating that the applicant got a sale deed of the informant's land executed through some imposter and the execution of the deed was witnessed by other two co-accused persons.

¶10

The applicant has filed a supplementary affidavit stating that the sale consideration of Rs.16,00,000/- was paid to the informant out of which Rs.10,00,000/- has been paid through two cheques each of Rs.5,00,000/- and Rs.6,00,000/- were paid in cash.

¶11

On 03.05.2024 this court had granted two weeks' time to the learned counsel for the applicant to file a supplementary affidavit bringing on record a copy of the bank statement of the applicant's

¶12

bank account indicating that the amount of cheques was actually debited from his bank account and was credited to purchaser's account.

¶13

The learned counsel for the applicant had sought adjournment of the case on 21.05.2024 to enable him to file a supplementary affidavit. On 05.07.2024 he had again sought a week's time to file a supplementary affidavit.

¶14

No supplementary affidavit has been filed bringing on record the copy of the bank account statement as directed in this court's order dated 03.05.2024.

¶15

Today, the learned counsel for the applicant has advanced his submissions in support of the bail application without seeking time to file any supplementary affidavit or without even pointing out to the court that a supplementary affidavit has been called for and has not been filed.

¶16

From the aforesaid conduct of the applicant, it appears that the averments made in the supplementary affidavit that the applicant had paid a sum of Rs.16,00,000/- to the informant is false.

¶17

Keeping in view the aforesaid conduct of the applicant, this court is not inclined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction by enlarging him on bail.

¶18

Accordingly, this bail application stands rejected.

¶19

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶20

Order Date :- 19.7.2024 Ram.

¶21

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

Devendra Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devendra Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

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

Jagat Ram Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Vishal Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

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

Ram Shabad Yadav vs State of Up and 6 Others

Sukhpal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Vyas Shukla vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.