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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39790

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6136 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Sachida Nand,Jyoti Rajpoot Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

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

¶8

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

¶9

As per the prosecution case, a complaint was received on 20.10.2022 alleging the commission of forgery in connection with 17 plots situated in Transport Nagar, owned by the Lucknow Development Authority. The specific allegation against the applicant is that, in connivance with co-accused Sri Krishna, he got a forged document prepared, purporting to show that the Lucknow Development Authority had executed a lease deed in his favour with respect to Plot No. F-480, Transport Nagar Scheme, despite the fact that no such record exists in the official records of the Authority.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that co-accused Sri Krishna, who was alleged to have used his personal ID to manipulate the computer records of the Lucknow Development Authority in connection with the sale of Plot No. F/480, Transport Nagar Yojna, has already been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.01.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15218 of 2025. The applicant seeks parity with the said co-accused. He further

¶11

submits that case of the applicant is on better footing than coaccused Sri Krishna. The offences alleged are triable by a Magistrate. The applicant is in judicial custody since 20.05.2025 and has duly explained his criminal history involving three cases in the bail application.

¶12

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.

¶13

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.

¶14

On due consideration to the bail order of co-accused Sri Krishna, so also the fact that the offences are triable by magistrate, the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.05.2025; 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.

¶15

Considering the bail granted to co-accused Sri Krishna, the fact that the alleged offences are triable by a Magistrate; the applicant is in custody since 20.05.2025; he has explained his criminal antecedents, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court finds it to be a fit case for grant of bail.

¶16

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant Vinod Kumar involved in Case Crime No. Crime no. -254/2023, U/S-419/420/467/468/471/120-B I.P.C., Police Station - Gomti Nagar, District - Lucknow, 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:-

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

(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.

¶21

(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.

¶22

(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 in accordance with law.

¶23

(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. (now Section 84 BNSS) 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 IPC (now Section 209 of BNS).

¶24

Order Date :- 11.7.2025

¶25

R.C.

¶26

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

Vinod Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mohd. Wahid Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Shahanawaz Khan @ Annu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Add. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Rajendra Prasad @ Buddhi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

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

Ved Prakash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Ganga Dhar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another