Allowed

Yashpal Diwakar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Allahabad HC13 Sept 2024/9820/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail application for an applicant falsely implicated in a cheating and forgery case. Finding the offence triable by a magistrate, lack of independent witnesses for recovery, and absence of prior conviction, the court granted bail imposing standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:63693

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9820 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Yashpal Diwakar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Sheo Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that from one recovery, he has been falsely implicated in two separate crime. In the first crime No. i.e. 88 of 2024, the applicant has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 09.09.2024 passed in criminal misc. bail application No. 9568 of 2024 and the second is the present one.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that from the possession of the applicant two mobile phones, two cheque books and one ATM as well as Rs. 170/- cash has been shown to be recovered. The applicant is not named in the FIR. There is no independent witness of the recovery. The recovered mobile and Rs. 170/- cash belongs to the applicant. The offence is triable by magistrate. Except the confessional statement of the applicant and the co-accused, there is no other material to link the applicant with this crime. The applicant is languishing in jail since 28.06.2024. The applicant is not the previous convict.

¶9

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.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not

¶11

dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

On due consideration to the fact that the offence is triable by magistrate; except the confessional statement of the applicant and the co-accused, there is nothing on record against the applicant; the applicant is not the previous convict, coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 28.06.2024 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.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant, Yashpal Diwakar, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 89/2024, under Sections 419/420/467/468/471/120B IPC and Section 66D of the I.T. (Amendment) Act, 2008, Police Station - Cyber Crime, District - Lucknow, 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:-

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

(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.

¶22

Order Date :- 13.9.2024 R.C.

¶23

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

Yashpal Diwakar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yashpal Diwakar 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

Mohd. Tauseef and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

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

Ramashanker Dubey @ Ramashanker Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home,Lko. and Another

Smt. Usha Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Gaurav Rajvanshi vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Ashwani Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another