Allowed

Kaushlendra Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC1 Oct 2024BAIL/10373/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A judge allowed a bail application for an applicant falsely implicated in a cheating and forgery case. After noting he has explained antecedents and lacks flight risk, the court ordered his release on personal and surety bonds with strict conditions to prevent tampering with evidence, intimidating witnesses, or absconding after a proclamation.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions preventing tampering, intimidation, absence, or misuse of bail liberty.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:67972

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10373 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Kaushlendra Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Kumar Singh,Ashok Kumar Singh

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sudhir Kumar Rai

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State as well as Shri Sudhir Kumar Rai, learned Advocate who has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant which is taken on record.

¶8

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the alleged agreement to sell regarding the property in question has been executed by co-accused Narendra Pal Singh. The applicant being the son of co-accused Narendra Pal Singh, who was the marginal witness in the sale deed, has been falsely implicated. The offences are triable by magistrate. The applicant is languishing in jail since 14.06.2024. He has explained his criminal antecedent in para 3 of the supplementary affidavit.

¶10

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the bail application.

¶12

Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that prior to

¶13

this, two more agreement to sell were executed in which the applicant was the marginal witness.

¶14

On due consideration to the fact that the offences are triable by magistrate; he has explained his criminal antecedent, coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 14.06.2024 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶15

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant involved in Case Crime No. 1042/2023, under Sections 420/406/352/467/468/471 IPC, Police Station - Kotwali, District - Unnao, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶17

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶18

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶19

(iii) 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.

¶20

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when 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.

¶21

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the

¶23

court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

Order Date :- 1.10.2024 R.C.

¶25

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

Kaushlendra Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaushlendra Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Qazi Saif Rehman Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Kunwar Chand Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Vijay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Aquib Nasim Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Kaushlendra Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Narendra Kumar Tripathi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Affairs Lko.