Allowed

Rakesh Tripathi @ Rakesh Kumar Tripathi v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Allahabad HC6 May 2024BAIL/2670/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under FIR No. 09 of 2018 for forgery and cheating offences. Applicant sought bail on grounds of parity with three co-accused already granted bail. Court allowed the application on the ground of parity and released him on personal bond with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to be released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to specified conditions.

Rakesh Tripathi @ Rakesh Kumar Tripathi vs State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:70218

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2670 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rakesh Tripathi @ Rakesh Kumar Tripathi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Pathak,Dileep Kumar Pathak,Vijay Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Rao Narendra Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in F.I.R. No. 09 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali City, District Gonda with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is in jail since 12.01.2023. He further relies on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sheila Sebestian Vs. R. Jawaharaj and Anr. in Criminal Appeal No.359-360 of 2010 and submits that no document was sent to F.S.L. for examination which was allegedly prepared by the applicant. He further submits that charge sheet has already been filed and the applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial proceeding. He further submits that other co-accused persons, namely, Mahendra Pratap Singh, Arun Kumar Dixit and Anil Kumar Singh, having identical role, have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 01.03.2024, 25.07.2024 and 28.08.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 12827 of 2023, 12987 of 2023 and 4391 of 2024, respectively. 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

Photocopy of the bail order of co-accused Anil Kumar Singh provided by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶10

Shri Rao Narendra Singh, learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant, but fairly concedes that similarly situated co-accused Mahendra Pratap Singh, Arun Kumar Dixit and Anil Kumar Singh have already been granted bail.

¶11

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A., ground of parity with the coaccused and going through the material available on record as well as totality of fact and circumstances, I am of the view that it is a fit case for bail. Application stands allowed on the ground of parity.

¶12

Let applicant -Rakesh Tripathi @ Rakesh Kumar Tripathi be released on bail in F.I.R. No. 09 of 2018, 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 an 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 office 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

¶17

counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A IPC.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) 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.

¶20

Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.

¶21

Order Date :- 17.10.2024 VKS

¶22

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

Rakesh Tripathi @ Rakesh Kumar Tripathi v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Tripathi @ Rakesh Kumar Tripathi 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Kamlesh Kumar Vs Shri Anuj Singh, Collector/ D.M. Sitapur and Others

Shravan Kumar Singh Vs Dr. Vijay Bahadur Dwivedi, Director Horticulture U.P. Lko. and Another

Shyam Lal and Another Vs Miss. Aakriti Srivastava Tehsildar Tehsil Sarojini Nagar Lko.

Nathi Lal vs Mr. Prashant Kumar Director, Samaj Kalyan Vibhag, Lko. and Others

Amarjeet Singh vs Rajesh Kumar Singh, Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Jail Admin. / Reforms Services, Lucknow and Others

Nand Lal Mishra vs Shri Anupam Gupta Managing Director Forest Corporation Lko