Allowed

Mahendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and Another

Allahabad HC10 Dec 2024ABAIL/2700/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted interim anticipatory bail to the applicant in a cheating and forgery case. The court imposed conditions including appearance before the court, no tampering with evidence, and permission to travel abroad. The matter was listed for further hearing.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail granted subject to conditions including personal bond, sureties, and specific restrictions on movement and tampering.

Mahendra Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2700 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Mahendra Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Kumar Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 455 of 2024, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468 & 471 of the IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District-Gonda.

¶7

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated. He next added that the applicant is neither seller nor purchaser nor the marginal witness of the alleged sale deed.

¶8

Adding his arguments, he submits that as per the narration in the F.I.R., the applicant is involved in the alleged offence,but, there is no ample evidence against him to show as to how he is the beneficiary, as no sale consideration amount has been incredited in the account of the applicant. He submits that the applicant has criminal antecedent of 16 cases and in most of the cases, he has been enlarged on bail. He also submits that since there is an acute apprehension that the police will arrest the present applicant and therefore, he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is not entitled for any relief.

¶9

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court finds it a fit case for grant of interim anticipatory bail.

¶10

Accordingly, till the next date of listing, the present applicant- Mahendra Pratap Singh shall be released forthwith, in case of his arrest, in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction

¶11

of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶12

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

¶13

(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;

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

Steps be taken within a week.

¶21

If the steps are taken, the office shall proceed accordingly.

¶22

List/put up this matter in the third Week of January, 2025.

¶23

In the meantime, learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no. 2 shall file their counter affidavits.

¶24

Order Date :- 10.12.2024 Mayank

¶25

Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mahendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief 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

Raman Sahni vs State of U.P. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

M/S Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Lmt. Thru. Its Dir. Dhananjay Subramanium and 3 Others vs the Directorate of Enforcement (Ed) Deptt. of Revenue Thru. Direct. and 3 Others

Yagya Prakash Tripathi @ Vinod Kumar and 4 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sheetla Sahai vs State of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Lko

Mo. Raja @ Ali Raja @ Raja vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Farook Alias Farook Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others