Vijay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:53505

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4140 of 2023

Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar,Santosh Kumar Giri

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.417 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow.

¶9

In the prosecution case it is alleged that applicant on the basis of forged sale deed as well as other documents has got mutation of plot No.1/261 in his name in the record of Avas Vikas and thereafter showing it to be owned by him the applicant sold it in favour of Ashfaq Ali for a consideration of Rs.25,00,000/- out of which Rs.10,00,000/- has been received in his account.

¶10

Learned counsel for applicant submits that he has not received any money in his account. Applicant has been falsely implicated. Offences are triable by magistrate. Applicant is in jail since 11.11.2022 however, he has no criminal antecedent.

¶11

It is lastly submitted by counsel for the applicant that the alleged sale deed which is shown to be executed by the applicant is not executed by the applicant actually. The parentage of the applicant is Vijay Kumar S/o Shubhash whereas in the sale deed the name mentioned is Vijay Kumar S/o Ram Kumar who is different person and not the applicant.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer and has submitted that applicant has received the consideration amount of Rs.10,00,000/-in his account.

¶13

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 11.11.2022 having no criminal history, charge-sheet has been filed, offences are triable by magistrate, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant Vijay Kumar be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case

¶21

of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

(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 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.

¶23

Order Date :- 5.8.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶24

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

Vijay Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tushar Deewan Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home and Anr.

Abhimanyu Kumar Rai Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Civil Sectt and Another

Vikas Singh Vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home, Civil Secretariat

Mohd. Shamim Ahmed @ Mohd. Samim Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Dalbag Singh @ Dilbag Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Lavkush Alias Lavkush Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.