Allowed

Premkala v. State of U.P. Thru. Pirn. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC5 Dec 2024BAIL/10795/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10795 of 2024, the Allahabad High Court at Lucknow granted bail to the applicant Premkala accused under Sections 406, 420, 468, 471, and 120-B IPC. The court found the applicant fit for bail as she was willing to refund the disputed amount within ten days and had no criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Premkala was released on bail on personal bond and two sureties against undertaking to refund the disputed amount within ten days and abide by bail conditions.

Premkala Vs State of U.P. Thru. Pirn. Secy. Home Lko. — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:81216

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10795 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Premkala Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Pirn. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Singh,Sanjana Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohit Sharma,Mukul Kumar Sharma

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Supplementary Affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release her on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 338 of 2023, under sections 406,420,468,471,120-B of the I.P.C.,Police Station-Hazratganj, Lucknow, District-Lucknow.

¶9

In paragraph no. 3 of the Supplementary Affidavit, it has been stated that Rs. 19 Lac has been transferred in the account of the applicant and in paragraph no. 4 of the same, it has been stated that the applicant is willing to pay/refund the amount, which has been incredited in her account through bank transactions to the persons concerned.

¶10

It has also been indicated by the learned counsel for the informant that vide the Supplementary Affidavit dated 02-12-2024, the paper is appended at page no. 11, wherein the amount has been disclosed, which was sent by the different account holders in the account of the applicant i.e. about Rs. 23,74,000/-

¶11

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that infact the amount is incredited in the account of the applicant due to some oral agreement in between the parties and there is no offence committed by her. He next

¶12

added that the applicant is still ready to repay the aforesaid amount to the persons concerned within ten days from the date of her release. He submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent and she is languishing in jail since 2806-2024 and she undertakes that in case, she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶13

Per contra, learned counsel for the informant has opposed the contentions aforesaid on merits, but, he has no objection, if the applicant is ready to repay back the amount to the persons concerned within a stipulated period of time, as may be fixed by this court.

¶14

Learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed for grant of bail to the applicant.

¶15

Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that some amount was incredited in the account of the applicant and the Supplementary Affidavit filed by the applicant, is apparent that Rs.19Lac is admittedly incredited in her account and the applicant is ready to repay the same to the persons concerned.

¶16

The bonafide of the applicant has also been disclosed before this court that no offence has been committed by the applicant though that is due to some oral agreement in between the parties, the amount was incredited in her account; there is no previous criminal antecedent of the applicant; the applicant is languishing in jail since 28-06-2024 coupled with the fact that she has undertaken that if she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶17

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of

¶18

India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

¶19

Let the applicant- Premkala, involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶20

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶21

(2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. She shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶22

(3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and

¶23

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶25

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case

¶26

It is further provided that if the applicant fails to refund the aforesaid amount within period of ten days from the date of her release from jail, the informant is at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail immediately thereafter.

¶27

Order Date :- 5.12.2024 AKS

¶28

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Premkala v. State of U.P. Thru. Pirn. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Premkala v. State of U.P. Thru. Pirn. 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

Sharvan Kumar and Another Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Sachin Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Virendra Kumar Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue , Lucknow and Others

Rajendra Patel @ Bacholi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Vijay Kant Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Shailesh Rastogi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.