Allowed

Monu Rathore v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Allahabad HC29 Aug 2024/9224/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application by the accused of forgery and cheating for fraudulently obtaining a bank loan by hypothecating the complainant's land. Offences triable by magistrate and no criminal history; bail granted with conditions against tampering and witness intimidation.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in like amount, subject to conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:58912

¶2

Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9224 of 2024 Applicant :- Monu Rathore Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶4

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

¶5

It is alleged in the prosecution case that the applicant in connivance with his mates and bank employees prepared a forged document and got sanction a loan on the land of the complainant by hypothecating the complainant's land and has taken a loan of Rs. 5,21,000/-.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the offences are triable by magistrate. The applicant is illiterate. It has been further submitted that Omveera Singh, Bank Mitra whose name has been dropped took his Aadhar Card on the pretext of providing awas. Omveera Singh in connivance with the branch manager has falsely implicated the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.01.2023 without having any criminal antecedents.

¶7

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.

¶8

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.

¶9

On due consideration to the fact that the offences are triable by magistrate, coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 27.01.2023 without having any

¶10

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.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant, Monu Rathore, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 527/2022, under Sections 420/467/468/471 IPC, Police Station - Lonar, District - Hardoi, 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:-

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

Order Date :- 29.8.2024 R.C.

¶20

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

Monu Rathore v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monu Rathore 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

Sonu Faujdar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Lko.

Syed Mehdi Hasan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Lko. and Another

Sonu Faujdar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Lko.

Munesh Kumar @ Munesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Ravindra Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Kailash Chandra @ Vidavadi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.