Allowed

Neel Kamal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Allahabad HC5 Sept 2024ABAIL/2041/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for an accused not taken into custody, who had already executed a bond under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. The court set conditions including arraignment before the Trial Court.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed subject to personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties, with conditions to appear before the Trial Court.

Neel Kamal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:60991

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2041 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Neel Kamal

¶5

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Sanat Singh,Manish Kumar Verma,Sudhir Kumar,Suhail Kashif Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶8

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 440 of 2022 under Sections 419, 420, 504 I.P.C., Police Station- Mahmoodabad, District- Sitapur.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was falsely implicated in the present case as the applicant was employee in the company in question. He further submits that as per the prosecution case, the money was invested in the company, but there is no specific allegation that the applicant was cheating the informant of the present case. He next submits that the applicant was not taken into custody during the course of investigation and as all the alleged offenses were punishable upto seven years, bond was taken from the applicant in accordance with provisions of Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. He also submits that the applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has relied on the decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court passed in the cases of Sushila Aggarwal And Other Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) And Another reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1 and Siddarth vs. State of U.P. & Anr. reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 615 and submits that the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that after detailed investigation, charge-sheet has already been

¶12

submitted. However, he does not dispute the fact that the applicant was not taken into custody during the course of investigation and the alleged offenses are punishable upto 7 years.

¶13

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the anticipatory bail application, F.I.R., chargesheet as well as other relevant documents; it is evident that the applicant was not taken into custody during the course of investigation and he was released after taking bond under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. In such circumstances, the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶14

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶15

In case the applicant is taken into custody by Investigating Officer/Investigating Agency, then he shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail after taking personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount with the following conditions:-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶17

(ii) 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

(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.

¶19

Order Date :- 5.9.2024 Gaurav/-

¶20

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Neel Kamal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neel Kamal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

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

Anupam Kumar Upadhyaya and Others Vs Sri Nath Singh Kushwaha , Finance Controller, Police Head Quarter U.P. Lko. and Others

Subhash Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. Lko. and 2 Others

Shiv Kumar @ Shiv Kumar Yadav Vs Shri Nitish Kumar, D.M., Ayodhya

Naumi and Others Vs Sri Subhash Singh, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tahsil Jalalpur, Distt. Ambedkar Nagar

Anshu Kumar Pandey vs Mr. Surendra Kumar Tiwari, Secy. Basic Education Board U.P., Prayagraj

Sudhir Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another