Allowed

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

Allahabad HC1 Oct 2024BAIL/10525/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application for an accused in a plot-sale fraud case involving Shine City Infra Project Private Limited. Court considered the compromise returning money to the complainant's wife, offence being magistrate-triable, and incarceration period, and enlarged the applicant on bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant enlarged on bail on personal bond and two sureties, with six imposed bail conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:68205

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10525 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Aquib Nasim Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Desh Mitra Anand,Utkarsh Anand 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.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.737 of 2021 under Section 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow.

¶8

In the F.I.R. it is alleged that the accused persons were operating Shine City Infra Project Private Limited company from their office situated at 1/5, 4th Floor, R Square Complex, Vipulkhand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow and also built large townships and made residential plots available to the public in the townships. The accused persons told the complainant alluring things and promised to show him the land, on the basis of which the complainant booked a plot number H 550, area 640 square feet. Agreed amount was paid by the complainant. Nothing is due upon him, however still the sale deed has not been executed by the accused persons in favour of the wife of the complainant. His money has been duped by the accused persons.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that money has been returned to the wife of the complainant pursuant to the compromise, which is on record. He submits that the offence is triable by magistrate. The applicant has explained the criminal history of two cases in the bail application. The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.4.2024.

¶10

It is lastly 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 A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Perused the record.

¶13

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record, and the facts that the offence is triable by magistrate, compromise entered between the victim and the accused persons, the period of incarceration and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, bail application is allowed. Let the applicant, Aquib Nasim involved in the aforesaid Case Crime Number 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:-

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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 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.

¶21

Order Date :- 1.10.2024 Madhu

¶22

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aquib Nasim 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.