Bail application in a cheating and criminal breach of trust case arising from an alleged loan of Rs. 23,85,000/-. The court granted bail on conditions including repayment of the amount within two months of release, with liberty to the informant to seek cancellation if repayment is not made.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:83662
Court No. - 15
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2164 of 2024
Applicant :- Sukesh Rajan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Mishra,Bhup Chandra Singh,Girish Kumar Tiwari,Ravi Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amrendra Bharti,Uma Kant
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Uma Kant Verma,learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
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. 0069 of 2023, under sections 323, 406, 420, 409, 504 and 506 of the I.P.C., Police Station-Gazipur, DistrictLucknow.
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 admittedly, the applicant had taken some amount from the informant and he is ready to repay the same, as the same was taken due to some misconception. He submits that there was no mens-rea to commit any offence, as is alleged in the first information report and the police, without collecting any cogent piece of evidence against the applicant, has filed the chargesheet. He added that there is no complaint against the applicant that he has never absconded from the investigation proceedings and he undertakes that he will always cooperate in the trial proceedings. He also submits that there is no possibility that the trial would be concluded in near future and the applicant is languishing in jail since 04-11-2023. He added that the applicant has explained criminal history in the Rejoinder Affidavit. He also submits that the applicant undertakes that he will return back the amount to the informant within two months from the date of his release from the jail. Further 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.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the informant submits that the amount of Rs. 23,85,000/- was taken by the applicant and thus, he has committed cheat and fraud, but, he has no objection if the amount is returned back to the informant within a stipulated period of time, as may be fixed by this court.
Learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions of the learned counsel for the applicant on merits and submits that the applicant is not entitled for any relief.
Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is languishing in jail since 04-11-2024 and it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that there is no possibility that the trial would be concluded in near future; criminal history of the applicant has been explained; the applicant has undertaken that the amount was taken under some misconception and there is a civil liability and he would return back the amount within two months from the date of his release from the jail 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.
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.
Let the applicant- Sukesh Rajan, 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:-
(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;
(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;
(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
(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 Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
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.
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.
The informant is at liberty to move an application for cancellation of the bail after passing of period of two months from the date of release of the applicant if the amount is not returned back to him.
Order Date :- 13.12.2024 Mayank
Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant charged under IPC sections 323, 406, 420, 409, 504 and 506 is entitled to release on bail during trial.
6 provisions across 4 enactments
Sukesh Rajan
State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.
Shree Prakash Singh
As recorded by the court registry
6 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
