Allahabad High Court
Jitendra vs Central Bureau Of Investigation, ... on 16 May, 2018
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Dinesh Kumar Singh-I
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18323 of 2018
Applicant :- Jitendra
Opposite Party :- Central Bureau Of Investigation, A.C.B
Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Daga
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Gyan Prakash
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Amit Daga, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Gyan Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the C.B.I. and perused the record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the incident is said to have occurred between 10.8.2010 to 24.5.2011, whereas the FIR has been lodged on 30.3.2012 but there is no plausible explanation for the delay in lodging the FIR. He next argued that the applicant is not in receipt of any money which has been embezzled by Smt. Poonam and Dipesh Jain along with the main culprits, namely, Pramod Jain and D.P.Singh and now he is being made an accused for the crime which he has not committed.He next argued that so far as trial is concerned, there are 83 prosecution witnesses, out of whom only 3 witnesses have been examined.The applicant undertakes to cooperate with the trial. He further argued that the father of the applicant, namely, Jagat Singh has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 14.5.2018 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.17927 of 2018. The other co-accused persons, namely, Atul Kumar Maheshwari & Saurabh Kumar Gupta have also been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 9.4.2018 and 12.4.2018 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.14733 of 2015 and Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 9505 of 2015 respectively, copies of which have been annexed at pages-283 to 287 of the writ petition, hence, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is in jail since 3.10.2014.
Learned counsel for the C.B.I. opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant. He pointed out that in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.14733 of 2015 & Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 9505 of 2015, the trial of the case has already been directed to be expedited by this Court vide orders dated 9.4.2018 and 12.4.2018 respectively.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant-Jitendra involved in Case Crime No. R.C.120 2012 A 0003, under Sections 120-B r/w 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Section 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(D) of The Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station-C.B.I.,A.C.B., District Ghaziabad be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.one lac with two sureties (one should be of his family members) 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 he 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 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.
(iii) 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, 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 him in accordance with law.
As the trial of the case has already been expedited in the Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.14733 of 2015 & Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 9505 of 2015 vide orders dated 9.4.2018 and 12.4.2018 respectively, hence, no order is being passed for expediting the trial of the case.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 16.5.2018/NS
