Allowed

Babadin Rajbhar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC25 Jul 2024/3914/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed bail to Babadin Rajbhar accused of cheating and forgery offences. The applicant, aged 72 with no criminal antecedent, argued his innocence and the pending civil suit regarding the same property. The Court found it to be a fit case for bail, imposing standard conditions to prevent tampering with evidence and witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding tampering with evidence, witness intimidation, and presence in court.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:50679

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3914 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Babadin Rajbhar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Harish Chandra Yadav,Chanda Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

It is alleged in the prosecution case that 1/2 of gata No. 400 rakba 0.331 hectare was owned by Shripal, real brother of the informant, who has died. The informant being the only sister is legal heir of the deceased. To usurp the land of Shripal, the applicant Babadin Rajbhar impersonated himself as Shripal and sold the said land to Rajrani wife of Chotelal.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent. He is 72 years old. The informant has already filed a suit for cancellation of the sale deed which is pending adjudication before the competent civil court. The memo of the suit is on record as Annexure No. 2 to the bail application. The applicant is languishing in jail since 28.12.2022 without having any criminal antecedent.

¶9

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

On due consideration to the age of the applicant as well as considering the fact that the offences are triable by magistrate; charge sheet in the matter has been filed, coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 28.12.2022 without having any criminal history and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant, Babadin Rajbhar, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 273/2022, under Sections 419/420/467/468/471 IPC, Police Station - Kotwali Bhinga, District - Shrawasti, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

(iii) 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

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶18

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the

¶20

court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶21

Order Date :- 25.7.2024 R.C.

¶22

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

Babadin Rajbhar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babadin Rajbhar 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

Bhanu Pasi Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Neeraj Sahu Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Ajay Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Ram Pravesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Hari Shanker Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.