Roop Ram vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Crime and Investigation Lko.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:31243

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7309 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Roop Ram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Crime And Investigation Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Sheo Prakash Singh,Abhishek Singh,Afaq Zaki Khan,D.K. Singh Somvanshi,Rajesh Kumar Shukla,Sant Vijay Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ranjana Agnihotri,Ratnesh Kant Agnihotri (In Person)

¶6

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶7

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

¶8

Application for dismissal of bail application on behalf of informant filed today is taken on record.

¶9

This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No. 51 of 2024 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 IPC, Police Station Mohammdi, District Kheri.

¶10

As per contents of FIR, allegation levelled is that the applicant was instrumental in fraudulently updating the adhar of one Bharat Giri in the name of one Rajendra Kant Sharma and on that basis executed two power of attorneys in his favour allegedly executed by the said Rajendra Kant Sharma. Allegation levelled is also that on the basis of forged adhar card, and ICICI bank account was also opened by the applicant alongwith the said person Rajendra Kant Sharma who in fact allegedly passed away in the year 2015. The allegation levelled is subsequent to demise of Mr. Sharma, the power of attorneys were registered subsequently in the year 2019 and the other in 2020 with a will deed also allegedly executed in favour of applicant being registered in year 2020.

¶11

It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that he has been falsely implicated in allegations levelled against him which would be evident from the fact that there is no material linking the applicant with the alleged fraudulent updatation of adhar card of the said Bharat Giri. It is submitted that the informant himself did not have any knowledge with regard to alleged abduction of Bharat Giri or updation of adhar card being fraudulent and is said to have derived the said information from the wife of said Bharat Giri. It is submitted that even the mobile numbers indicated in the updation of ahdar card and in the subsequent deeds did not belong to the applicant. As such it is submitted that applicant does not have any direct or even indirect evidence recorded against him with regard to allegations levelled. It is submitted that applicant is under incarceration since 18th February, 2024 with only one prosecution witness having been examined out of total of 19 witnesses indicated in the charge sheet.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for informant has opposed bail application with submission that upon investigation, the aspect of updation

¶13

of adhar card of Bharat Giri as well as death certificate issued in favour of Mr. Rajendra Kant Sharma were found to be forgeries and therefore a direct link is established with the applicant in view of the fact that he is beneficiary as per the two power of attorneys and will deed registered subsequent to demise of the said person in the year 2015. It is submitted that there is direct and cogent evidence of the fact that the mobile number indicated in the deeds was under utilization by the applicant.

¶14

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material on record, prima facie subject to evidence led in trial, it appears that the entire aspect of forgery fringes upon the alleged fraudulent updation of adhar card which was in the name of Bharat Giri and was subsequently updated in the name of Rajendra Kant Sharma which forms the basis of two power of attorneys and the alleged will deed executed in favour of applicant. From narration in the F.I.R., it appears that the applicant is the main beneficiary of the said documents which are alleged to be fabricated. Therefore the said aspect would therefore require consideration during course of trial with evidence particularly in view of subsequent registration of all the deeds after the alleged demise of Rajendra Kant Sharma in the year 2015. The aforesaid aspect would also require consideration whether the death certificate was also a forged document or not.

¶15

Considering submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, at this stage, since the witnesses of fact have not yet deposed in trial, this Court does not find any good ground to entertain this bail application which is accordingly rejected.

¶16

The trial court however is directed to expedite deposition of witnesses of fact be concluded within a period of six months from today. In case the deposition of witnesses of fact can not be concluded within the aforesaid time frame, liberty is granted to the applicant to approach this Court again for grant of bail or in case of delay in conclusion of trial.

¶17

Order Date :- 26.5.2025 prabhat

¶18

Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Roop Ram v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Crime and Investigation Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Roop Ram v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Crime and Investigation 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

Shankar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

Rajlal Kori Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Bilkish Bano Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Alok Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. U.P. and 3 Others

Sumit Joshi @ Sunny vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Secondary Education Lko. and 3 Others vs Praveen Singh and Another