Allowed

Vedprakash Verma v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Oct 2024ABAIL/10238/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed anticipatory bail for the applicant in a cheating and forgery case, relying on Sushila Aggarwal. The court granted bail on personal bond with two sureties, imposing standard conditions including surrender of passport and presence at trial dates.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till conclusion of trial on personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions regarding passport surrender and attendance.

Vedprakash Verma vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:174659

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10238 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vedprakash Verma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Tripathi I Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Rakesh Tripathi I, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 545 of 2023, under Section 420, 482 I.P.C., Police StationGarhmukteshwar, District- Hapur.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Allegation in the first information report is that applicant is owner of the alleged vehicle and he was running his vehicle using different number plate. Allegation alleged in the first information report is false and baseless. Applicant has no criminal antecedent to his credit. It has been submitted that in case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶9

On the other hand, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of " Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶11

Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may be adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶12

Let the applicant- Vedprakash Verma , who is involved in the aforesaid crime, be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

i. The applicant shall not leave India during the pendency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶14

ii. The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.

¶15

iii. That 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;

¶16

iv. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶17

v. In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail, the trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law.

¶18

vi. 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

Order Date :- 7.11.2024 Aditya

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ADITYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vedprakash Verma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vedprakash Verma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bilal Alias Mohd Bilal and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rafi Khan and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ritik Upadhyay and 2 Others vs State of Up and 2 Others

Hamid Langadha vs State of Up and Another

Om Prakash Sharma vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Milan Singh vs State of U.P.