High Court · 2025

Applicant :- Ghanshyam Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandan Srivastava,Anand Dubey,Ganesh Nath Mishra,Pranshu Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 836 of 2022 under sections 409, 420, 506 and 120B of IPC, P.S.- Gomti Nagar District -Lucknow. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that Suresh Kumar Verma, is the main accused and the identically situated co-accused Kamlawti Verma has already been enlarged on bail by the order passed by coordinate bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application 7585 of 2024 vide order dated 16.01.2025. Order dated 16.01.2025 is quoted hereinunder:- Heard Sri Anand Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anant Pratap Singh, learned AGA for the State. The present applicant is in jail since 02.01.2022, in case crime no. 836 of 2022, under Sections 409, 420, 506 and 120 B of IPC at Police Station Gomti Nagar District Lucknow. The learned counsel has stated that mainly the offence, if any, has been committed by her husband as he formed a trust, wherein, she was one of the trustee. The transactions/acts have been done/committed by her husband who is in jail. As a matter of fact, the present applicant was not fully aware of the transaction of the trust but being a wife, she trusted her husband and in a bonafide manner acted pursuant to the instructions of her husband. There are 12 similar FIRs, wherein, the applicant has been granted bail in 11 cases and those orders have been enclosed with the bail application and the rejoinder affidavit. Besides, the aforesaid cases, there is one more FIR in Gangster Act, wherein, no bail application has been filed. The learned counsel has further submitted that if the applicant is released on bail, she shall shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Further, the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. Learned AGA for the State has opposed the aforesaid bail application but could not dispute the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant. Without entering into merits of the issue, considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; contents and allegations of the FIR and the fact that the present applicant is languishing in jail since 02.01.2022; there are 12 similar FIRs, wherein, the applicant has been granted bail in 11 cases; and undertaking of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Kamlawti Verma, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she 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. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (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 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 her in accordance with law." Referring the aforesaid, he submits that the coordinate bench of this Court has considered the case and granted the bail and the case of the present applicant is identically situated as such, he may also be enlarged on bail. Adding his arguments, he submits that the criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 03.03.2023 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid on merits, but he could not dispute the fact that the identically situated co-accused Kamlawti Verma has already been enlarged on bail. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the identically situated co-accused Kamlawti Verma has already been enlarged on bail by the order passed by coordinate bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application 7585 of 2024 vide order dated 16.01.2025; applicant 03.03.2023; the criminal history of the applicant has satisfactorily been explained in the bail application coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. languishing Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant- Ghanshyam Verma involved in the aforementioned 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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. He 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; (3) 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 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 25.6.2025 Mayank MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Applicant :- Ghanshyam Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandan Srivastava,Anand Dubey,Ganesh Nath Mishra,Pranshu Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 836 of 2022 under sections 409, 420, 506 and 120B of IPC, P.S.- Gomti Nagar District -Lucknow. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that Suresh Kumar Verma, is the main accused and the identically situated co-accused Kamlawti Verma has already been enlarged on bail by the order passed by coordinate bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application 7585 of 2024 vide order dated 16.01.2025. Order dated 16.01.2025 is quoted hereinunder:- Heard Sri Anand Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anant Pratap Singh, learned AGA for the State. The present applicant is in jail since 02.01.2022, in case crime no. 836 of 2022, under Sections 409, 420, 506 and 120 B of IPC at Police Station Gomti Nagar District Lucknow. The learned counsel has stated that mainly the offence, if any, has been committed by her husband as he formed a trust, wherein, she was one of the trustee. The transactions/acts have been done/committed by her husband who is in jail. As a matter of fact, the present applicant was not fully aware of the transaction of the trust but being a wife, she trusted her husband and in a bonafide manner acted pursuant to the instructions of her husband. There are 12 similar FIRs, wherein, the applicant has been granted bail in 11 cases and those orders have been enclosed with the bail application and the rejoinder affidavit. Besides, the aforesaid cases, there is one more FIR in Gangster Act, wherein, no bail application has been filed. The learned counsel has further submitted that if the applicant is released on bail, she shall shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Further, the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. Learned AGA for the State has opposed the aforesaid bail application but could not dispute the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant. Without entering into merits of the issue, considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; contents and allegations of the FIR and the fact that the present applicant is languishing in jail since 02.01.2022; there are 12 similar FIRs, wherein, the applicant has been granted bail in 11 cases; and undertaking of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Kamlawti Verma, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she 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. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (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 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 her in accordance with law." Referring the aforesaid, he submits that the coordinate bench of this Court has considered the case and granted the bail and the case of the present applicant is identically situated as such, he may also be enlarged on bail. Adding his arguments, he submits that the criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 03.03.2023 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid on merits, but he could not dispute the fact that the identically situated co-accused Kamlawti Verma has already been enlarged on bail. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the identically situated co-accused Kamlawti Verma has already been enlarged on bail by the order passed by coordinate bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application 7585 of 2024 vide order dated 16.01.2025; applicant 03.03.2023; the criminal history of the applicant has satisfactorily been explained in the bail application coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. languishing Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant- Ghanshyam Verma involved in the aforementioned 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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. He 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; (3) 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 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 25.6.2025 Mayank MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench