Allowed

Vaishno Das Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. (Home), Govt. of U.P. Lucknow

Allahabad HC27 Feb 2024ABAIL/394/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court granted anticipatory bail to Vaishno Das Mishra in a cheating, forgery, and cheating by personation case. The Court noted the applicant had a valid license, no criminal antecedents, and cooperated with investigation. The applicant was directed to surrender for trial if summoned.

What did the court decide?

The application for anticipatory bail is allowed. The applicant is directed to surrender before the trial court if summoned and is released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.

Vaishno Das Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:45366

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 394 of 2024 Applicant :- Vaishno Das Mishra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. (Home), Govt. Of U.P. Lucknow

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Kumar Pal,Shivam Trivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State/respondent as well as perused the record.

¶7

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant apprehending his arrest in Case Crime No.0577 of 2022 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 384 I.P.C., Police Station Ghazipur, District Lucknow.

¶8

As per the prosecution case a written complaint was given by the informant at Police Station Ghazipur Lucknow alleging that on 22.11.2022 he came to know that the applicant is illegally operating Shivani Transport Service Center near polytechnic Chauraha and is sending individual passengers to various places on buses without permit and extracting illegal money. After receiving this information the informant along with ARTO and other police personnel found two buses parked in which passengers were sitting. The passengers told that they have been charged individually on the basis of individual tickets.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a licensee under Section 124 of the Motor Vehicle Rules 1988. The licence is on record. He has further drawn attention of this Court toward GST invoice of Om Shivani Yatayat Sewa Kendra run by the son of the applicant.

¶10

He further submits that as per the conditions of the permit of the

¶11

UPSRTC, which is on record at page no.35 under Condition no.13 he is permitted to do booking from his office. It is submitted that the applicant has nothing to do with this case. He was not present at the spot. The applicant has no criminal antecedent. The vehicle number shown in the F.I.R. is of two wheeler. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application, however, could not dispute the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. He further submits that charge-sheet in the matter has been filed.

¶13

On due consideration of the arguments advanced; perusal of the record; so also the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent, he has cooperated in the investigation and undertakes to cooperate in the trial and the vehicle number sown in the F.I.R. is a two wheeler, it would be expedient in the interest of justice that the liberty of the applicant may be protected in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.

¶14

In view of the above, since, charge-sheet in the matter has been filed, the accused applicant is directed to surrender before trial court, if he is summoned to face trial for offence in question. The accused applicant shall be released on bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶15

(i) 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 tamper with the evidence;

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶17

(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the

¶18

prosecution witness;

¶19

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

¶20

(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

¶21

Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.

¶22

It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶23

In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed . Order Date :- 3.7.2024 R.C.

¶24

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

Vaishno Das Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. (Home), Govt. of U.P. Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vaishno Das Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. (Home), Govt. of U.P. Lucknow

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

Tara Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Smt. Snehlata Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Roshan Lal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Civil Secrett. Lko.

Shivam Maurya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Govt. U.P. Lko.

Rohit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Naveen Jayaswal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Secrt. Lko.