Allowed

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

Allahabad HC9 Aug 2024BAIL/8656/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application filed by Ram Gopal accused of cheating and forgery. The Court held it to be a fit case for bail considering the applicant's age (68), lack of criminal record, the civil nature of the dispute, and the offence being triable by a magistrate. Bail was granted on a personal bond with two sureties and specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to not tamper with evidence or witnesses and to remain present in court.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:61202

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8656 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ram Gopal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kr. Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Satyendra Kumar Tripathi

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶8

It is alleged in the prosecution case that the complainant’s brother Uday Pratap died on 09.01.2024. He executed a will in favour of the complainant. Consequently, the complainant filed a case for mutation before the competent court on the basis of will deed. Thereafter, the accused persons filed objection and also produced forged death certificate of deceased Uday Pratap.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the offences are triable by magistrate. He is 68 years old. He has no criminal history. The dispute between the parties is civil in nature. Both the parties are claimed their right on the basis of the alleged will deed executed in their favour by the same deceased person which can be adjudicated by the competent Court and no in the FIR. The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.07.2024 without having any criminal antecedents.

¶10

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not

¶12

dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

On due consideration to the fact that the offences are triable by magistrate; age of the applicant, coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 10.07.2024 without having any criminal history and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant, Ram Gopal, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 186/2024, under Sections 419/420/467/468/471 IPC Police Station - Kotwali Nagar, District - Balrampur, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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

¶21

proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

(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.

¶23

Order Date :- 4.9.2024/R.C.

¶24

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

Vivek Misra Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Deptt Govt Civil Sectt and Another

Alok Misra Vs State of Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Raj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Gautam Patel vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Manmohan Yogi vs State of U.P. Thru Addl. Chieef Secy. Home Civil Sec. Lko

Nankunna @ Shahid Ali and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another