Bail application for an accused in a forgery case arising from alleged forged mutation documents. Proceedings were stayed by the Supreme Court in a co-accused's SLP; applicant had been jailed since July 2023 and offences are magisterially triable. Bail was allowed with standard conditions without opinion on merits.
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:45206
Court No. - 14
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 465 of 2024
Applicant :- Satish Kumar Tripathi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajendra Pratap Singh,Surendra Singh
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
cognizance was taken and non-bailable warrants were issued against the applicant and other co-accused persons accordingly.
Against the order dated 01.07.2017, the co-accused Arun Kumar Singh @ Munna and others have filed criminal revision bearing No.171/2017 in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.5, Pratapgarh, the Revisional Court vide order dated 02.06.2018 has set aside the order dated 01.07.2017 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kunda and remitted the matter back for fresh consideration.
Against the order dated 02.06.2018 Kamlesh Kumar Singh filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. bearing No.2139/2019 before this Court which was dismissed vide order dated 05.01.2023.
After remand of the case, it was heard by the concerned court and vide order dated 18.08.2022 final report was rejected and learned trial court took cognizance and issued summons to the accused persons. After coming to know the summoning order, applicant filed a Criminal Revision before the District and Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh which is pending. The other coaccused Arun Kumar Singh @ Munna filed criminal revision before the Special Judge which was rejected on 12.05.2023 and subsequently, the same was challenged before this Court vide Application U/S 482 No.5520/2023 which was dismissed by this court vide order dated 21.08.2023.
Against this order dated 21.08.2023, SLP (crl.) was filed bearing No.14723/2023 (Arun Kumar Singh @ Munna & others vs. State of U.P. and others) wherein the Supreme Court has stayed the proceedings arising out of F.I.R. No.61/2015, P.S. Kunda, District Pratapgarh.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that while the applicant was in jail since 04.07.2023 in connection with Case
Crime No.444/2022, under Section 409 IPC, P.S. Raniganj, District Pratapgarh, he was taken into custody in the present case and he is languishing in jail since 20.07.2023. He submits that the applicant has been granted bail in the earlier Case Crime No.444/2022 however, in this case he is languishing in jail since 20.07.2023.
It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that applicant is a government servant. No sanction has been obtained under Section 197 Cr.P.C. The proceedings of trial have been stayed by the Supreme Court in pending SLP (crl.). The applicant cannot be kept behind the bars for unlimited period.
It is lastly submitted that there is a family dispute between the co-accused and Kamlesh Kumar Singh. Applicant is not concerned in any manner nor he is beneficiary, and has also not prepared any forged document. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Offences are triable by magistrate.
personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) 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.
(iv) 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. 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.
(v) 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(vi) 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
Order Date :- 3.7.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-
Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant should be enlarged on bail in forgery-related offences given prolonged incarceration, proceedings stayed by the Supreme Court in a related SLP, and offences triable by a magistra
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Satish Kumar Tripathi
State of U.P.
Karunesh Singh Pawar
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
