Allowed

Dharmendra Kumar Vishwakarma v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko

Allahabad HC22 Jul 2024/7831/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) released the applicant, Dharmendra Kumar Vishwakarma, on bail in a cheating and forgery case. The court accepted his undertaking to not misuse liberty and cooperate with the trial, noting that co-accused had already been granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions.

Dharmendra Kumar Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl… — Money Laundering | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:49265

¶2

Court No. - 28

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7831 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Vishwakarma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Suneel Kumar Singh Kalhans,Shikha Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Attrey Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 182 of 2024, under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34/201/120-B of I.P.C., P.S.-Sushant Golf City, District -Lucknow.

¶8

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant case due to ulterior motive. He added that the applicant is the Truck Driver and he had no knowledge with respect to the packets of 'Fensidile Cough Syrup', which were loaded in the truck. He submits that in so far as the recovery memo, which shows that two PAN Cards were recovered from the possession of the applicant, were being taken away by him for the purpose of getting corrected the age in the Aadhar Card. He also submitted that the main accused namely, Shailendra Arya has already been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 26-06-2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6919 of 2024 and another co-accused namely, Pawan Gupta, has also been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 26-06-2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Case No. 6899 of 2024. He also submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent and he is languishing in jail since 09-04-2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions afaoresaid and submitted that the applicant was arrested from the sport and there is huge recovery from the possession of the applicant and therefore, he is well connected with the offence and thus, he is not entitled for any relief.

¶10

Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the co-accused persons namely, Shailendra Arya and Pawan Gupta, have been enlarged on bail by this court and the applicant was driving the container and he has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 09-04-2024 coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if granted and would cooperate in the trial proceedings; thus without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant- Dharmendra Kumar Vishawakarma , involved in the aforementioned crime 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:-

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

(3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and

¶15

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶17

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶18

Order Date :- 22.7.2024 AKS

¶19

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dharmendra Kumar Vishwakarma v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmendra Kumar Vishwakarma v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dinesh Kumar Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Anand Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Arpit Pandey @ Ganesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lucknow

Shivam Singh @ Aryan Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Govt. Lko

Sadan Kumar @ Chandan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Smt. Neelam Gond vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others