Allowed

Piyush Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2024BAIL/1777/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Allahabad allowed a bail application by Piyush Tiwari in a cheating case. The court noted the applicant's innocence was asserted, a co-accused was already on bail, and the underlying property agreement was unregistered and paid token stamp duty, indicating potential informant impropriety.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Piyush Tiwari released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:15996

¶2

Court No. - 27

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1777 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Piyush Tiwari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Mishra,Sunil Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Gyanendra Singh, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 474 of 2021, under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of F.I.R. lodged on 16.07.2021 against five persons, including the applicant, alleging that the informant had entered into two agreements to purchase property from the accused persons but no sale deed was executed. The informant further alleged that the informant had paid Rs. 9 Crores to the accused persons on various dates for getting an arms license for his son and employment for various persons but they did not get either the arms license or the employment.

¶9

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case.

¶10

A copy of the agreement to purchase the property record in the F.I.R has been annexed in the affidavit, which indicates that it has been executed on a stamp duty worth Rs. 100 only and it has not been registered.

¶11

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of the bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶12

Co-accused Manish Tiwari has been granted bail by this Court by means of the order dated 25.08.2023 passed in CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.10681 of 2023.

¶13

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that even as per the F.I.R allegations, it was the informant himself who claims to have paid a huge sum of money for getting an arms license for his son and employment for

¶14

various persons through illegal means, which prima facie indicates commission of offence by the informant himself; that the agreement for purchase of immovable property is not registered and it does not confer any right on the purchaser, coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 08.08.2023 whereas a co-accused has been granted bail and without making any observations which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail.

¶15

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant- Piyush Tiwari be released on bail in the aforesaid case, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to the following conditions: -

¶17

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶18

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶19

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶20

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶21

Order Date :- 22.2.2024 prateek

¶22

Digitally signed by :- PRATEEK ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Piyush Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Piyush Tiwari 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

Smt. Reena Pandey and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Amit Singh Yadav Alias Amit Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Vijay Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lucknow and Others

Piyush Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vivek Pal, Thru. Father Om Prakash Pal Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and 3 Others

Smt. Seema Jaiswaal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko.