Allowed

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

Allahabad HC8 Aug 2024/8023/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application in a case alleging a fake government-job racket involving fraudulent appointment letters and cheques. Court noted primary allegations against co-accused, charge-sheet filed, no flight risk or witness-tampering apprehension, and granted bail with conditions without commenting on merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two reliable sureties, subject to conditions regarding attendance and conduct during trial.

Vijay Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:55693

¶2

Court No. - 8

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8023 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vijay Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amar Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State-respondent and Sri Amar Singh, learned counsel for the complainant.

¶7

By means of the instant bail application, the applicant seeks bail in respect of Case Crime No.646 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 504, 506 IPC, relating to Police Station-Kotwali Dehat, District Gonda.

¶8

The primary allegations from the perusal of the FIR indicates that the applicant along with the other co-accused were involved in assuring innocent persons for getting them employed in Government Departments. It is in this context that it is alleged that certain amount of money was sent into the account of the applicant.

¶9

It is further alleged that despite having taken the money, the applicant and the other co-accused kept assuring that the complainant may be given the employment and thereafter by giving a fraudulent appointment letter which was followed by a fraudulent postal letter, the complainant has been cheated. When he had realized and had sought the return of money, the other co-accused issued certain cheques which were also fraudulent as such the money could not be returned.

¶10

It is also alleged that the applicant had fraudulently sent a legal notice claiming that he had handed over the money to the complainant and upon asking the same, the FIR has been lodged. It is also urged that it is a primarily civil dispute which has been given a colour by lodging the FIR.

¶11

It has further been pointed out that the co-accused Aman Kumar @ Sattan has been enlarged on bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court and it is further urged that there is no direct allegations against the applicant, coupled with the fact that in

¶12

the entire FIR, the main allegations are against the other coaccused. The applicant is in Jail since 07.02.2024 and it has also been pointed out that the charge sheet has already been file in the month of June, 2024 and in such circumstances neither the applicant is at flight risk nor he is in position to influence any witness or tamper with any evidence.

¶13

The applicant has explained his criminal history in paragraph 4 of the supplementary affidavit dated 26th July, 2024 to indicate that in one case he has been enlarged on bail and in the other a final report has been filed. It is thus urged that in the aforesaid circumstances, the applicant be enlarged.

¶14

The learned A.G.A. as well as Sri Amar Singh, learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail and the learned A.G.A. has submitted that in so far as the charge sheet which has been filed against the applicant also includes Section 120-B as it has been included. Be that as it may, it could not be disputed by the learned A.G.A. that from the perusal of the FIR, the allegations of the running the racket of providing employment in Government Departments and seeking the money is primary against the other co-accused. It also could not be disputed that primary the allegations against the applicant is that his account number has been utilized for parking certain funds. The fact whether there is any monetary transaction between the applicant and the complainant and whether the alleged legal notice sent on behalf of the applicant for return of the money is valid is yet to be seen and tested in trial.

¶15

Considering the rival submissions, the facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record as well as considering the nature of allegations and accusation against the applicant, the severity of the punishment if convicted and the period of incarceration as well as the fact that no apprehension has been expressed by the learned AGA that the applicant is at the risk of fleeing justice or that he would tamper with evidence or influence any witness, hence, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶16

Let the applicant- Vijay Singh involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶17

At the time of executing required sureties the following conditions shall be imposed in the interest of justice.

¶18

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he

¶19

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

(ii) 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.

¶21

(iii) 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.

¶22

(iv) 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. If in the opinion of the trial court, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶23

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

¶24

Order Date :- 8.8.2024 Asheesh

¶25

Digitally signed by :- ASHEESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Singh 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Raj Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Beenu Singh and Others Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pratapgarh and Others

Bhanu Pratap Verma Vs District Deputy Director of Consolidation / District Magistrate, Bahraich and Others

Ram Kumar and Others Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation, Lucknow and Others

Aizaz Khan @Tinku vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Dhirendra Singh Vs Additional Commissioner Judicial Iind, Lucknow Division, Lucknow and Another