Allowed

Jitendra Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P.

Allahabad HC31 Jul 2024BAIL/8246/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed a bail application filed under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B IPC. Granting bail on the ground of parity with similarly situated co-accused already released, the court imposed standard conditions regarding presence, non-tampering, and appearance at trial stages.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with prescribed conditions for attendance and conduct during trial.

Jitendra Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:57447

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8246 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Jitendra Shukla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Verender Kumar Tiwari,Vinayak Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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 Nagar, District Gonda with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶8

The submissions of learned counsel for the applicant are that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case. The case of the applicant is similar to co-accused Mohmmad Shakir Khan and Karishma Singh, who have been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 28.05.2020 and 26.02.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1918 of 2020 and 1812 of 2024 respectively. The bail order of co-accused Mohmmad Shakir Khan and Karishma Singh are annexed as Annexure 5 to the bail application. It is further submitted that the applicant has earlier been implicated in one case also, in which, he has already been enlarged on bail. In these circumstances, the applicant, who is in jail since 09.12.2023 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. opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant, but fairly concedes that similarly situated coaccused Mohmmad Shakir Khan and Karishma Singh have already been granted bail.

¶10

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A., ground of parity with the co-

¶11

accused 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 -Jitendra Shukla be released on bail in F.I.R. No. 09 of 2018 (supra), 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 her 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 counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A 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 (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.

¶19

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.

¶20

However, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

¶21

Order Date :- 22.8.2024 VKS

¶22

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

Jitendra Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P.

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

Tula Ram Yadav and Another Vs Ashok Kumar Shukla Posted Conservator of Forest and Anr.

Shivam Mehrotra @ Shivam Malhotra Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow

Shivam Mehrotra @ Shivam Malhotra Vs State of U.P. through secretary home department U.P Government civil secretariat Lucknow

Sushil Pandey Vs Shri Sanjay Prasad, Prin. Secy., Home Deptt., Civil Secrtt., U.P., Lko.

M/S Santosh Ent Bhatta, Vill. Ravaniya Norrpur, Thru. Its Authorized Signatory Santosh Kumar Singh vs Shri Manoj Singh, I.a.S., Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Forest, Environment and Climate Changes, Lko.

Anand Praksh vs Shri Vijay Pratap Singh, Distt. Basic Education Officer, Hardoi and Another