Allowed

Satyendra Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2024ABAIL/2521/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An interim order was passed granting anticipatory bail to an applicant attached with an FIR for cheating and forgery. The court imposes standard conditions including availability for interrogation and no tampering with evidence, while listing the matter for full hearing.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on interim anticipatory bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to six standard conditions including appearing for interrogation and not tampering with evidence.

Satyendra Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2521 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Satyendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sikandar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 106 of 2022, under sections 419,420,467,468,471 of IPC P.S.- Shukul Bazar, DistrictAmethi.

¶7

The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He next added that identically situated co-accused, namely, Bhartendu has already been enlarged on interim anticipatory bail in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2492 of 2024 vide order dated 7.11.2024 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court and applicant is seeking parity of the same. He further submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is cooperating in the investigation proceedings. He also submits that there is apprehension that the applicant will be arrested by the police, thus, submission is that the the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.

¶8

On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the submissions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is involved in committed offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.

¶9

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, till the next date of listing, the present applicant- Satyendra Kumar, shall be released forthwith, in case of his arrest in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶10

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶11

(ii) 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 or tamper with the evidence;

¶12

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶13

(iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶14

(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶15

(vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶16

(vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶17

Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2, returnable at an early date.

¶18

Steps be taken within a week.

¶19

If steps are taken, office shall proceed accordingly.

¶20

List/put up this matter in the 4th week of January, 2025.

¶21

In the meantime, the State as well as opposite party no. 2 may file their counter affidavits.

¶22

Order Date :- 18.12.2024

¶23

Shravan

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Satyendra Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyendra Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

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

Indra Prakash Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Home Lucknow

Shivam Maurya vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Guddu Rawat @ Shiv Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Ankul Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Gudiya Khatoon vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Rajesh Kumar Patel vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.