Allowed

Savitri Devi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC13 May 2024/2291/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application by a woman accused of impersonation and forgery in a property sale. Court found no material showing impersonation or flow of funds to her and granted bail on personal bonds and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties of Rs.20,000 each, subject to conditions to attend hearings, not commit similar offences, and not tamper with evidence.

Savitri Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:36621

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2291 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Savitri Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Singh Chauhan,Alok Kumar Singh,Ramakar Shukla,Subodh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Rishikesh Verma, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

2 . The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.898 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC, Police Station Kotwali Sadar, District Lakhimpur Kheri.

¶8

3 . In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the applicant had sold the property belonging to the informant by impersonation. It was also alleged that earlier the applicant had executed a sale deed fraudulently.

¶9

4 . In the light of the aforesaid allegations, the Counsel for the applicant argues that the applicant is an illiterate lady and was taken by someone for preparation of widow pension. He argues that no amount was credited in the account of the applicant and thus, the applicant is also a victim of forgery. He further argues that in terms of the counter affidavit, statement of account has been filed, which indicates the presence of only Rs.100/-, thus, the applicant had not received any benefits out of the consideration of the sale deed, which was paid through cheque. The applicant is a lady and is in custody since 05.11.2022. It is further argued that not even a single witness has been examined so far out of total four proposed witnesses. The criminal antecedents of the applicant includes an offence under Section 304 of IPC, in which, the applicant is on bail.

¶10

5. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer by arguing that it was the applicant, who had impersonated on behalf of the real vendor and the sale deed was executed based upon the said impersonation, thus, the applicant should be denied bail.

¶11

6. Considering the submissions made at the bar, prima facie,

¶12

there is no material with regard to the impersonation in place of real vendor and the materials on record including the counter affidavit do not show the flow of fund in favour of the applicant; the applicant is a lady and she is in custody since 05.11.2022 and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant if enlarged on bail, would in any way adversely affect the trial, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

7. Let the applicant Savitri Devi be released on bail in the abovesaid first information report number on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶14

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶15

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶16

(c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

Order Date :- 13.5.2024 akverma

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Savitri Devi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Savitri Devi 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

Tasouver Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mainuddin @ Salman Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Smt. Basanti Tiwari Vs State Thru. C.B.I. New Delhi

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.Thru. Secy. Home Lko.and Others

Latif Ansari vs State of Up Thru. Prin. Secy. Home