Allowed

Vishun Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Jan 2025BAIL/667/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application by an accused in a forgery case concerning sureties filed on forged documents. The court relied on settled bail jurisprudence, noted co-accused had been granted bail and the applicant's incarceration, and allowed bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Vishun Kumar released on bail on personal bond and two reliable sureties, subject to conditions including no tampering, no witness intimidation and presence at trial.

Vishun Kumar vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:8466

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 667 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Vishun Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Kumar Pal,Praveen Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Ankit Kumar Pal, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Chhavipal Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant Vishun Kumar under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 42 of 2024 for offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Kotwali Fatehgarh, District Farrukhabad, during pendency of the trial, after rejecting the bail application of the applicant by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Farrukhabad vide order dated 20.11.2024.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant is innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the first information report dated 15.2.2024 has been lodged by Sub-Inspector of Police on the basis of order of the court against the six named persons alleging that six persons filed sureties on the basis of forged documents. It is further submitted that applicant is not named in the F.I.R.

¶9

It is further submitted that there is no pre-summoning evidence with regard to fact that the documents were prepared by the applicants. It is further submitted that all offences are punishable up to seven years imprisonment.

¶10

It is further submitted that co-accused Ashok Kumar has been granted bail by this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 32074 of 2024 vide order dated 09.09.2024.

¶11

He has next argued that the applicant is languishing in jail since 08.10.2024, having no criminal history nor there is any likelihood of fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence in case of released on bail.

¶12

Per contra , learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicants cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, they do not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicants are released on bail, they will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

It is well settled position of law that bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception and refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution [Vide State of Rajasthan Vs. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308 Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors Vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429 and Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2021) 10 SCC 773] .

¶14

Keeping in mind, larger mandate of Article 21 of the constitution of India, the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused-applicants, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/ State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, present bail application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant Vishun Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions :-

¶16

(i) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial

¶19

court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.

¶20

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court.

¶21

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel.

¶22

(vi) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that absence of the applicants 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 in accordance with law.

¶24

The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the applicants, if there is no other legal impediment.

¶25

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶26

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶27

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶28

Order Date :- 20.1.2025 MAA/-

¶29

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AZAD ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vishun Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishun Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yogendra Pratap Alias Shekhar vs State of U.P. and Another

Monu @ Deepak Tyagi vs State of Upand Another

Sanjeev and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Chandra Yadav vs State of U.P.

Smt Savita Devi @ Savitri Singh and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Praveen Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another