Allahabad High Court
Rajendra Pandey vs State Of U.P. on 5 April, 2021
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 15
Case :- BAIL No. - 3538 of 2021
Applicant :- Rajendra Pandey
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Salik Ram Tiwari,Dinesh Kumar Pandey,Sanjeev Kumar Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that two cases have been shown in the gang chart against the present applicant. In the gang chart in case crime No. 145/2020, under Section 302/120-B/34 I.P.C., the applicant has been enlarged on bail, copy of that bail order is on record as annexure No. 3 to the bail application. So far as the second case i.e. case crime No. 109/2020, under Section 323/504/506 I.P.C., Police Station Dhammaur, District Sultanpur, is concerned it is a non cognizable and relates to non-cognizable offence and in this case till date the applicant has not received any summon, intimation from the court concerned.
It is further contended that according to the explanation of Section 2(d) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the report submitted by the police officer in a case which discloses the commission of non-cognizable offence shall be deemed to be a complaint. In support he has relied on the judgment dated 30.03.2016 of this Court passed in 482 No. 5714/2014 titled as "Gulam Jilani @ Chand Vs. State of U.P." and thus submits that even after submission of charge sheet the cognizance has been taken by magistrate such order is nullified in the eyes of law as it dehors the provision of Section 2(d) of Criminal Procedure Code.
Apart from the cases mentioned in the gang chart, there is no other case pending against the accused applicant.
It has been further submitted that applicant is in jail since 14.08.2020 and if facility of bail is granted, there is no apprehension that he will flee from the judicial process and he will abide by the orders passed by the Court below and will co-operate in speedy trial of the case.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but has not disputed the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, for the period for which he is in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.
Let the applicant, Rajendra Pandey, involved in Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 315/2020, under Sections 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station - Dhammaur, District - Sultanpur, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iv) 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.
(v) The applicant shall submit an undertaking on affidavit in terms of Section 19 (4) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 that he will not indulge in any case for or misuse the liberty of bail.
(vi) 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.
(vii) 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.
Order Date :- 5.4.2021/R.C.
