Allowed

Atul Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow

Allahabad HC18 Jun 2024BAIL/2613/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application for bail in a cheating and criminal breach of trust case. The court observed that while the applicant was in custody for over a year, no prosecution witness had been examined by the trial court, entitling him to bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence and appearing in court.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:43614

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2613 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Atul Kumar Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.133 of 2022 under Sections 419, 420, 109, 409 I.P.C., Police Station Baddupur, District Barabanki, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is an innocent person and he is in jail since 29.06.2022. He further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case as he is son of one of the Directors of Company in question. He further submitted that applicant is having criminal antecedent of 63 other cases and in 45 cases, he is on bail. He further submitted that charge sheet has already been filed but till today, not even a single witness has been examined by the trial court. He further submitted that similarly situated co-accused has already been granted bail by the trial court. In these circumstances, the applicant is also entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of the applicant for grant of bail and submitted that after collecting sufficient but he does not dispute this fact that applicant is in jail since 29.06.2022.

¶10

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, contents of the F.I.R., other relevant documents as well as totality of fact and

¶11

circumstances, as it is evident that the applicant is in jail since 29.06.2022 but till today, not even a single witness has been examined, therefore, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Let applicant - Atul Kumar Verma - be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶14

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶16

(iv) The applicant 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 IPC.

¶17

(v) 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., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC.

¶18

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶20

Order Date :- 20.6.2024

¶21

V. Sinha

¶22

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Atul Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atul Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow

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

Anand Kumar and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Sushila Devi vs Andra Wamshi, District Magistrate, Basti District Basti

Ghanshyam Maurya and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Salman @ Munawwar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home and 3 Others

Rajesh Singh @ Khanna vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Rakesh Kumar Awasthi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.