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

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:16405

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2402 of 2025

Applicant :- Amarjeet Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kr. Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State and perused the record.

¶7

This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.0234 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, registered at P.S.-Kotwali Utraula, District -Balrampur.

¶8

As per contents of First Information Report, the person named in the FIR along with certain other unknown persons are said to have executed a sale deed in favour of the informant's son by impersonating the actual owner of the property.

¶9

It has been submitted that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the charges levelled against him and that his name does not feature in the FIR and has been allegedly disclosed by the main accused Juber Khan @ Mohd Usman, who has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 07.02.2025 passed in Criminal Misc Bail Application No.12808 of 2024. It is submitted that another co-accused Raj Kumar has also been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 09.12.2024 passed in Criminal Misc Bail Application No.12695 of 2024.

¶10

It is also submitted that the applicant does not have any previous criminal history and is under incarceration since 04.11.2024 with only charge sheet having been filed.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed bail application with the submission that the involvement of applicant in the crime alleged is evident from the statement of main accused Juber Khan. However, it is not disputed that the applicant does not have previous criminal history and the co- accused Juber Khan has already been enlarged on bail.

¶12

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties, perusal of material available on record and prima facie subject to further evidence being led during trial, it appears that the applicant has not named in the FIR and his shown to be involved only on the basis of statement of main accused Juber Khan, who has been enlarged on bail as indicated above. The applicant does not have any previous criminal history and is under incarceration since 04.11.2024 and the trial is yet to commence.

¶13

Looking to the nature of allegations levelled against the applicant and submission made in the bail application, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, particularly since no reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses has been alleged, prima facie, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶14

Accordingly bail application is allowed .

¶15

Let applicant, Amarjeet involved in the aforesaid case crime 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 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.

¶17

(ii) 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.

¶18

(iii) 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.

¶19

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 21.3.2025 Renu/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- RENU AGARWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amarjeet v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home 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

Amit Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Dr. Indrajeet Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home

Paikarma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Rpin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Dhiru @ Dhirendra and another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Home, Lucknow

Rajesh Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Mujahid vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko