Anand Singh @ Anand Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:21859

Court No. - 17

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1777 of 2025

Applicant :- Anand Singh @ Anand Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Prasad,Kuldeep Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ankit Kumar Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State of U.P., Sri Harsh Kumar Thapar, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.229 of 2021, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120-B I.P.C. Police Station - Talkatora, District - Lucknow, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person, has been falsely implicated in the case and he is in jail since 4.9.2021. He further submits that there was some money dispute in between the parties and amount of Rs.5,50,000/- has already been paid to the informant and rest of the amount, i.e., Rs.3,00,000/- & Rs.3,50,000/- are being paid to Mr. Brajeet Kumar & Ms. Sneha Dixit, respectively vide Demand Draft Nos.649561 & 649560 dated 4.4.2025 issued by the State Bank of India, Lucknow Main Branch, Lucknow. He also submits that original demand drafts of aforesaid amounts are handed over to Mr. Brajeet Kumar S/o Dinesh Kumar, R/o Sikandapur, P.S. Beeghapur, District Unnao (Adhaar No.244353654473) & Ms. Sneha Dixit, r/o C-3052, Sapna Colony, Rajajipuram, Lucknow (Adhaar No.423763233327).

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that applicant was also implicated in two other cases, having identical facts and in one another case related to Gangster Act on the basis

¶11

of present case as well as two other cases. He also submits that trial of the case is not going on and till today, only one witness has been examined and in near future, there is no possibility of conclusion of trial. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Learned counsel for the complainant has no objection, in case, applicant is enlarged on bail as the original demand drafts of amount in question have already been received by the complainants.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submits that after detail investigation, sufficient evidences have been collected against the applicant, but he does not dispute this fact that aggrieved persons have already been received the demand draft of amount in question.

¶14

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A., material available on record, contents of F.I.R., supplementary affidavit, other relevant documents, nature of offence as well as facts and circumstances of the case, it is undisputed facts that amount mentioned in the F.I.R. has already been received to the complainant as well as victim, therefore, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶15

Let applicant - Anand Singh @ Anand Kumar Singh - be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, 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:-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶17

(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 him from disclosing such facts to the

¶18

Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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 229-A IPC.

¶21

(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.

¶22

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶24

Order Date :- 11.4.2025 GauraV/-

¶25

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Anand Singh @ Anand Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Singh @ Anand Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vakeel Khan Alias Vakeel Sunder Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Pankaj Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Ram Kishor and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Alakhram @ Alok Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Ram Charan Nishad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Km. Sanskrati through his mother Pooja Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and others