Allowed

Ekadashi Nishad v. the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin.Secy. Home Deptt.

Allahabad HC16 Apr 2024/4045/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving forgery and cheating related to land sale and bounced cheques. Relying on parity with co-accused who were already on bail, the court allowed the application, directing issuance of a personal bond with sureties and standard conditions to prevent tampering.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant released on bail by executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount.

Ekadashi Nishad Vs the State of U.P… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:29970

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4045 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ekadashi Nishad Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin.Secy. Home Deptt.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Vaibhav Srivastava,Vishnu Pratap Singh

¶6

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶7

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶8

Heard Sri Vaibhav Srivastava, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Puneet Kumar Yadav, the learned State Counsel and perused the record..

¶9

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 257 of 2023, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., registered at Police Station Kotwali Ayodhya, District Faizabad/Ayodhya.

¶10

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 02.05.2023 against five persons, including the applicant and an unknown person stating that the applicant and three other accused persons had shown a land to the informant and the informant and his sister purchased the land through two sale deeds dated 03.03.2021. Later on it transpired that the sale deeds had been executed by some imposters and the true owner of the land has filed a suit for cancellation of sale deed. The F.I.R. further states that a co-accused Ram Singh Nishad had given four cheques towards the refund of the sale consideration but the cheques were returned by the bank unpaid.

¶11

In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely

¶12

implicated in the present case. The applicant's involvement in total of 3 other cases has been disclosed in the affidavit filed in support of the application in which he is yet to be summoned.

¶13

The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that three co-accused persons, namely, Ram Anuj Verma and Anil Kumar Das and Ram Singh Nishad have been granted bail by means of order dated 06.03.2024, 20.12.2023 and 14.03.2024 passed by this court in Criminal Misc. Bail Applications Nos. 2361 of 2024, 14959 of 2023 and 2561 of 2024, respectively.

¶14

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶15

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the only allegation against the applicant is of being involved with other persons in showing the land to the informant; that the applicant has already given cheques to the informant towards refund of the sale consideration; that it appears that after dishonor of the cheques no complaint case under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act has been filed; that three co-accused persons have already been granted bail in the present case and the applicant is languishing in jail since 25.01.2024 and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that applicant is also entitled to be granted bail on the ground of parity.

¶16

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant- Ekadashi Nishad be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶18

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶19

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶20

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the trial court.

¶21

Order Date :- 16.4.2024 Pradeep/-

¶22

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

Ekadashi Nishad v. the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin.Secy. Home Deptt.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ekadashi Nishad v. the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin.Secy. Home Deptt.

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

Smt. Komal Shahi vs Ankur Jaiswal

Ravindranath Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Smt. Suchita and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home,Lucknow and Another

Collector Kheri Vs the Additional Commissioner Administration Lucknow and 8 Ors.

Ravendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Department of Home and Another

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