Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 3438 (ALL)

JAYVEER SINGH @ JASVEER SINGH v. STATE OF U. P.

2009-11-07

RAVINDRA SINGH

body2009
JUDGMENT Hon’ble Ravindra Singh, J.—The learned AGA has filed counter affidavit, which is taken on record. Heard, the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant Gyanendra in case crime No. 182 of 2009, under Section 420, 406, 471, 468, 467, IPC, P.S. Sahpau, District Hathras, with a prayer that he may be admitted to bail. 3. The FIR was registered on 21.11.2008 with regard to the incident dated 25.9.2007, with the allegations that the applicant has committed fraud and cheating by making fake call letters and taken the money to the tune of Rs. Two lacs from different persons with the assurance that they will get service in the Army. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that, Subhash, the co-accused has already been granted bail and the role of the applicant is similar to the said co-accused. 5. On the other hand, the learned AGA has contended that, there is active participation of the applicant, and he has recruited many persons in Army after taking huge amount of money from them. 6. On the other hand, the learned counsel afor the applicant has contended that nothing has been recovered from the possession of applicant and he has been falsely implicated in the case. The applicant is in jail since 24.6.2009. In case he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion about the merits of the case, let the applicant, Gyanendra involved in case crime No. 182 of 2009, under Section 420, 406, 471, 468, 467, IPC, P.S. Sahpau, District Hathras, be enlarged on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, with the following conditions : (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant will appear before the trial Court on the date fixed. (iv) The applicant will not leave the city without the permission of the Court concerned. 8. In defiance of the above conditions, the prosecution would be at liberty to move application for cancellation of bail. ————