Allowed

Anil Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC19 Dec 2024BAIL/11727/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal miscellaneous bail application, the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) allowed the application of Anil Kumar Singh. The court found it to be a fit case for bail upon application of a personal bond and sureties, citing lack of beneficiary role, filed charge sheet, and unsubstantiated tampering risks, while imposing strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding witness intimidation, court attendance, and surety verification.

Anil Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:85575

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11727 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Anil Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Singh,Raghvendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed today by the State 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 him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 38 of 2022, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 204 of the I.P.C. and 7A PC Act, Police Station-S.I.T., District -Lucknow.

¶9

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that the applicant is neither seller, nor purchaser nor marginal witness of the alleged sale deed.

¶10

Adding his arguments he submits that as per narration of the F.I.R., the applicant is involved in the alleged offence but there is no ample evidence against the applicant to show how he is the beneficiary, as no sale consideration amount has ever been credited in the account of the applicant. He next submits that the applicant has criminal antecedents of 37 cases and in most of the cases, he has been enlarged on bail. He further added that the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.12.2022 and that the charge sheet has already been submitted in the present matter, as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper with the evidence or would threaten the witness. He also submits that the applicant undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is not entitled for any relief as he has committed offence and there is cogent and credible evidence against him. He also added that there are 37 cases criminal history of the applicant.

¶12

Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that in the several cases, the applicant has been connected without any cogent and credible evidence and most of the cases, he has been enlarged on bail; the applicant does not seem to be the beneficiary, as he is neither seller, purchaser or the marginal witness of the deed in question; the chargesheet has already been filed; the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.12.2022 coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶13

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

¶14

Let the applicant, Anil Kumar Singh, involved in the aforementioned crime 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:-

¶15

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

¶16

(2) 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. He 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;

¶17

(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

¶18

(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 him, in accordance with law under

¶19

Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

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.

¶21

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.

¶22

Order Date :- 19.12.2024 Shravan

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Anil Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief 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

Ram Lakhan @ Aman Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Krishnakant Tripathi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

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

Ajay Kumar Jha and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Monu Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Jalalu @ Jalaluddin and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.