Allowed

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

Allahabad HC12 Sept 2024/9749/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Allahabad granted bail to Ashok Singh in a cheating and forgery case. The court held that despite the charge-sheet being filed and the severity of punishment, the applicant posed no flight risk. Bail was granted on bond with conditions to prevent tampering with witnesses and ensure court attendance.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond with two reliable sureties subject to five specific conditions regarding court attendance and conduct.

Ashok Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:63034

¶2

Court No. - 8

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9749 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ashok Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- S.C. Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶7

By means of the instant bail application, the applicant seeks bail in respect of FIR/Case Crime No.100/2023, under Sections 406, 420, 506, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Sandi, District Hardoi.

¶8

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that it is purely a civil dispute which has been given a colour of criminality by the complainant.

¶9

It is submitted that as per the averments contained in the FIR, it was alleged by the complainant that the applicant being the owner of a shop had sold the same to the complainant for a valuable sale consideration, however, the possession of the shop could not be transferred to the complainant and though he had demanded the refund of sale consideration to which the applicant is said to have threatened the complainant with dire consequences.

¶10

It is further submitted that the other co-accused namely Ram Pratap @ Badakku, who has been ascribed the role of introducing the complainant to the applicant has already been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4697 of 2024, decided on 02.05.2024, a copy of the bail order has been brought on record as Annexure No.4.

¶11

It is further urged that a bare perusal of the FIR, the contents are of civil nature, apart from the fact that the complainant has yet not filed any suit for cancellation of the sale-deed or recovery of the said sale money. It has also been submitted that the applicant is in jail since 28.04.2024 and the applicant has no criminal history except the present case.

¶12

Learned A.G.A., on the basis of material in the case diary available with him, has opposed the prayer for bail. It has been submitted that on 07.06.2024, the charge-sheet has already been filed under Sections 406, 420, 506, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the IPC.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record as well as the fact that the chargesheet has already been filed and also 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 and that the applicant has no history, 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.

¶14

Let the applicant Ashok Singh involved in the aforesaid FIR/Case Crime Number 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.

¶15

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

¶16

(i) 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

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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

¶20

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.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 12.9.2024 Rakesh/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH PRAJAPAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Yogesh Kumar Vs Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow Thru. Member and Others

Parsnath @ Parsnath Udayaraj Chauhan Vs Sub District Magistrate (Judicial), Tehsil Jalalpur, Ambedkar Nagar and Ors.

Abhay Khare Vs Estate of Late Shri Ram Prakash and Others

Mukeem Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Adarsh Nigam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko and 4 Others

Ashok Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.