Harishankar Rao vs. State Of U.P.

Held

The Court granted bail to the applicant, Harishankar Rao. The decision was based on the submissions made by the applicant's counsel, without commenting on the merits of the case. The Court found that the applicant was entitled to be enlarged on bail. The reasoning, though not explicitly detailed, appears to stem from the applicant's claim of false implication, the co-accused's statement implicating himself and providing a basis for the applicant's alleged role, the applicant's period of incarceration, and his lack of criminal history. The Court directed the applicant's release on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions including appearance on trial dates, not tampering with evidence, and not pressuring witnesses. The Court expressly left the merits of the case undecided.

Facts

The applicant, Harishankar Rao, is accused of opening a current account for MIS U.L.I.P. using his Aadhaar Card, PAN Card, and GST details on January 12, 2021. On January 17, 2022, he allegedly deposited a forged cheque of Rs. 10 crore, purportedly issued by Dilip Buildcon Ltd., into this account along with co-accused Pawan Kumar. Investigations revealed the cheque was not issued by the drawer and was forged. The co-accused, Pawan Kumar, stated to the police that he cloned the cheque and gave it to the applicant for deposit. The applicant has been in jail since January 19, 2022, and claims no prior criminal history. The case involves alleged offenses under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail, considering his alleged involvement in depositing a forged cheque and the statements of the co-accused, pursuant to Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code. Contentions: Petitioner (Applicant): The applicant contends he has been falsely implicated. He argues that the co-accused, Pawan Kumar, admitted to cloning the cheque and providing it to the applicant for deposit. The applicant's case is distinguishable from the co-accused's. He has been in jail since January 19, 2022, has no criminal history, and will not misuse liberty if released on bail. Revenue (State): The learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the applicant's submissions from the record.