Allowed

Yashpal Diwakar v. State of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Allahabad HC9 Sept 2024BAIL/9568/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Sections 419/420/467/468/471/120-B IPC and Section 66D IT Act for alleged impersonation of CBI officers to extort money via WhatsApp calls. Court noted long custody, no prior conviction, offences triable by magistrate and lack of independent witness to recovery, and granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

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

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:62089

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9568 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Yashpal Diwakar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Sheo Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.88 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 66D of the I.T. (Amendment) Act, P.S. Cyber Crime, District Lucknow.

¶8

In the prosecution case it is alleged that applicant along with the co-accused persons by making whats-app call upon the mobile number of the complainant threatened him by showing themselves to be a CBI officer and compelled him to withdraw the amount from his account and send it to the account of Keshav Goel from which account money was withdrawn and has been distributed amongst co-accused persons.

¶9

Learned counsel for applicant submits that F.I.R. has been lodged after delay of two days, there is no direct evidence in this case against the applicant. There is no recovery of money from the applicant or anyone else except Rs.170/- which belongs to the applicant. Applicant is not named in the F.I.R. There is no independent witness to the said recovery. The alleged SIM card belong to the account of Keshav Goel and not to the present applicant, there is no material to link the applicant for offence in question except the confessional statement of the

¶10

applicant and the other co-accused in police custody. Applicant is innocent and is in jail since 28.06.2024.

¶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 28.06.2024, applicant is not a previous convict, offences are triable by magistrte, there is no independent witness to the said recovery, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant Yashpal Diwakar 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:

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on

¶20

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.

¶21

(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.

¶22

Order Date :- 9.9.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶23

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

Yashpal Diwakar v. State of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yashpal Diwakar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Hem Karan Mathur Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Dept. of Home Lko. and Others

Chandra Prakash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Sri. Avnish Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Vinod Kumar Tiwari @ Lallu Maharaj vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Faizi Ahmad @ Jaleel Ahmad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 2 Others

Mayawati vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko