Allowed

Sunil Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Allahabad HC11 Feb 2025BAIL/1184/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application by an accused in a forgery/cheating case involving sale of land share with incorrect boundaries; correction deed executed. Court granted bail considering co-accused bail orders, incarceration period, and that offences are triable by magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties, with conditions imposed.

Sunil Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8799

¶2

Court No. - 16

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1184 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any forgery. He was shareholder of gata No. 1603. He sold his share of land. Inadvertently incorrect boundaries were mentioned for which correction deed has been executed. Offences are triable by magistrate. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.12.2024.

¶8

It has been further submitted that co-accused Sachin Jaiswal as well as Sandeep Yadav @ Sandeep Kumar have been enlarged on bail vide orders dated 01.07.2024 and 04.02.2025 passed in criminal misc. bail application Nos. 6098/2024 and 6053/2024.

¶9

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.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

On due consideration to the bail orders of co-accused persons; period of incarceration gone into by the applicant as well as

¶12

considering the fact that offences are triable by magistrate 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.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant Sunil Kumar, involved in Case Crime No. 539 of 2022 under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 447 of IPC P.S.- Inayat Nagar District - Ayodhya. 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:-

¶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 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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

Order Date :- 11.2.2025 R.C.

¶22

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

Sunil Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Shlpa Verma and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

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

Nawab Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Satyam Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Darbari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Jairam Singh Bhadauria Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others