Allowed

Ram Sanehi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC17 May 2024BAIL/5378/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail to accused Ram Sanehi in a cheating and forgery case chargeable under the Indian Penal Code. Court relied on the magistrate-level triability and the applicant's clean criminal record without opining on case merits.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and conditions regarding tampering with evidence, pressuring witnesses, and default in appearance.

Ram Sanehi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:66279

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5378 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ram Sanehi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Shailesh Kumar Singh,Dharm Trivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.142 of 2024, under Sections 420, 406, 506, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Gola, District Lakhimpur Kheri.

¶9

In the prosecution case it is alleged that applicant has sold part of Gata No.1428 rakba 0.119 hectare to the complainant for consideration of Rs.4,50,000/- however, at the time of mutation, the complainant came to know that the alleged land had already been sold.

¶10

Learned counsel for applicant has invited attention of the court towards two annexures which are extract of khatauni which show that so far as Gata No.1761 is concerned, name of the applicant has been cancelled from that gata and complainant's name has been entered thus, mutation is complete so far as the other gata is concerned i.e. Gata No.1428, the name of the applicant has been deleted which shows the bona fide of the applicant. The offences are triable by magistrate. Applicant is in jail since 14.03.2024 having no criminal history.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer.

¶12

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 14.03.2024 having no criminal history, offences are triable by magistrate, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant Ram Sanehi be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

¶14

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 24.9.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Sanehi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Sanehi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Smt. Pushpa Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko. and Another

Suneel Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Vipin Kumar (Vipin Kumar Alias V.P Impugned Chargesheet) Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Shivansh Srivastava and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home and Another

Brijesh Singh vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohit vs State of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another