Allowed

Phoolchandra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Allahabad HC1 Aug 2024/372/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment granted bail to the applicant accused under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, and 406 IPC. The Court noted that the case involved false implication, that the real owner had settled with the informant, and that the applicant was a first-time offender triable by a Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Accused Phoolchandra released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount.

Phoolchandra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:52817

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 372 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Phoolchandra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Raja Babu Gupta,Vikas Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed by the State is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Shri Raja Babu Gupta, 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- Phoolchandra for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 145/2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Mankapur, District Gonda, during trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that it is a case of false implication. The applicant is shown to have executed two sale deeds impersonating himself as his brother Rajesh, however, during the course of investigation a settlement appears to have arrived between the real brother of the applicant- real owner Rajesh when the informant which has been duly recorded by the Investigating Officer in the case diary wherein it was stipulated that a civil suit shall be instituted for cancellation of two sale deeds allegedly executed by the applicant impersonating as his brother Rajesh.

¶10

It is also submitted that the applicant is in jail in this case since 3.11.2023 and is not in a position to authenticate any civil suit has been filed, however, he had got knowledge that the said civil suit has been filed and therefore all probability the two sale deeds which are ab-initio or going to be cancelled and therefore the rights of Rajesh or purchaser have not been affected as no possession has been delivered to the purchaser in consequence to the two sale deeds.

¶11

It is further submitted that the applicant is not having

¶12

criminal antecedent and the conclusion of the trial may take some times. There is no apprehension that the accusedapplicant after release on bail, may flee from the process of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty. Charge sheet in this case has already been submitted.

¶13

It is further submitted that similarly placed co -accused persons, namely, Om Prakash Jaiswal and Shiv Balak Jaiswal have been granted bail by this Court vide, orders dated 27.2.2024 and 7.2.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. Nos. 413 of 2024 and 214 of 2024, respectively.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand opposes the prayer of bail of the applicant on the ground that the applicant is accused of committing an heinous offence, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶15

Considering the fact that the charged offences against the applicant are triable by Magistrate, charge sheet in this case has already been submitted, the applicant is in jail in this case since 3.11.2023 and he is not having any criminal antecedent, the real owner of the property which was sold through the impugned sale deeds belong to the real brother of the applicant, namely, Rajesh, who has not lodged any First Information Report against the applicant and a compromise also appears to have arrived between the real owner Rajesh and the informant and many co-accused persons have also been granted bail by this Court, a case of bail is made out in favour of the applicant. The bail application moved on behalf of the applicant is thus allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant- Phoolchandra 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:-

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

Order Date :- 1.8.2024 Muk

¶24

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

Phoolchandra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Phoolchandra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sharad Chandra Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Civil. Sectt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Sandeep Kumar Dubey @ Sukuru Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

Shailendra Jaiswal @ Vikku Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko.

Pramod Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Devaki Nandan Vs State of U.P.

Ram Saran Vs State of U.P.