Allowed

Atul Kumar Verma v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Allahabad HC1 Aug 2024BAIL/2415/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) allowed the applicant's release on bail after considering that he had been in jail since June 2022, other co-accused were already on bail, and no witnesses had been examined despite the lapse of over two years, while the court noted the substantial amount allegedly defrauded had not been pursued for recovery.

What did the court decide?

The applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, conditioned not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and to appear in court as required.

Atul Kumar Verma vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:57701

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2415 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Atul Kumar Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar,Abhishek Sonker,Brij Mohan Sahai

¶6

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anand Mani Tripathi,Manoj Kumar Mishra

¶7

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶8

Heard Sri Ajeet Kumar, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Punit Kumar Yadav, the learned counsel for the State, Sri Sudeep Seth, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Nadeem Murtaza, Advocate, the learned counsel for the informant and perused the records.

¶9

The learned counsel for the informant has filed a counter affidavit and the learned counsel for the applicant has filed a rejoinder affidavit today in the court, which are taken on record.

¶10

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.421 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 409, 34 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Barabanki.

¶11

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 05.05.2022 against five persons, including the applicant, his father, mother and two other persons stating that the applicant's father co-accused-Om Prakash Verma is the proprietor of Sankalp Trading Services and his mother coaccused-Mithilesh Verma is a director of M/s S.T.S. Infrabuild Pvt. Ltd. The other two co-accused persons Sharad Kumar Verma and Sangam Kumar Verma are also directors of the said

¶12

company. The aforesaid companies are engaged in the business of carving out plots of land and selling them. On the allurement made by the accused persons the informant and several other persons had made huge investments in the aforesaid companies but no return was paid to the informant and his family members.

¶13

In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. In the affidavit it is mentioned that the applicant is involved in 55 cases and except for one case under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, all the other cases are of similar nature. The applicant has already been granted bail in 53 cases.

¶14

The learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application and he has submitted that the accused persons have taken away Rs.1,36,22,000/- of the informant and his family members by fraudulent means. However, in response to a specific query put by the court, the learned counsel for the informant submitted that besides lodging of F.I.R. no proceedings for recovery of the amount have been instituted by the informant.

¶15

The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 29.06.2022 and in spite of lapse of more than two years, not even a single witness has been examined till date. Co-accused Om Prakash Verma has died and all the other co-accused persons namely Mithilesh Verma, Sharad Kumar Verma and Sangam Kumar Verma have already been enlarged on bail.

¶16

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of

¶17

the case and keeping in view the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 29.06.2022, whereas the other coaccused persons have already been enlarged on bail and without making any observation, 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 in the aforesaid crime.

¶18

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶19

Let the applicant-Atul Kumar Verma 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 following conditions:-

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court.

¶23

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶24

Order Date :- 23.8.2024 Ram.

¶25

Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Atul Kumar Verma v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atul Kumar Verma v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dharamraj and Others vs Deputy Director of Consolidation, Sultanpur and Others

Kumar Saurabh Trivedi @ Kumar Saurabh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Rashmi Tripathi vs State of Up and 5 Others

Smt. Laxmi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. Lko. and Another

Suraj vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Shamsher Bahadur vs Shri Suryapal Gangwar, D.M. / Collector, Lko.