Balveer Singh And Anr. vs State Of U.P.
2021 Latest Caselaw 4857 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 21
 

 
Case :- BAIL No. - 3256 of 2021
 
Applicant :- Balveer Singh And Anr.
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Devendra Pratap
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajeet Kumar Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

Heard the learned counsel for the applicants and Shri Ajeet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the complainant as well as the learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that an first information report was lodged wherein it is alleged that the applicants on the basis of forgery have tried to usurp the land of one Matroo who had died intestate and had no legal heirs. Since Matroo had died intestate accordingly the land had vested in the Gaon Sabha and by resorting to forgery the said land was got mutated in the name of the applicants. It is further stated that the order of mutation has been set aside by the competent court and in the aforesaid backdrop the first information report was lodged and the applicants have been in jail since 14.02.2021.

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the property in question undisputedly belonged to one Matroo and on the aforesaid basis the applicants had made an application before the Sub Divisional Officer which was considered and initially an order was passed in their favour on 23rd of July, 2012. It is further submitted that the aforesaid matter was challenged and finally the High Court in Writ Petition No.1534 (M/S) of 2019 passed a detail order dated 18.02.2019 wherein it was held that the Sub Divisional Officer did not have the jurisdiction to upset the finding recorded by the Tehsildar and accordingly the order dated 23.07.2012 and 26.10.2012 were set aside. The matter was remitted to the Sub Divisional Officer to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law and the observations made by the High Court in its judgment dated 18.02.2019. A copy of the judgment passed by the High Court has been brought on record as annexure no.4.

It is further submitted that the applicants had assailed the said order before the Apex Court, however, the same failed. In pursuance of the order passed by the High Court the Sub Divisional Officer thereafter heard the matter afresh and by means of order dated 05.09.2019 vested the said land in favour of the Gaon Sabha granting the liberty to the applicants to approach the appropriate court for seeking a declaration of their rights.

It is further submitted that in exercise of their rights the applicants have instituted a suit under Section 144 of the U.P. Revenue Code wherein the applicants had also made an application seeking interim relief and an order for status quo has been passed by the competent court. The applicants have filed the copy of the application for interim relief as well as a questionnaire indicating that the suit has been preferred by the applicants wherein an order dated 31.01.2020 directing the parties to maintain status quo was passed.

It is also submitted that in this view of the matter where the rights of the parties have yet to be adjudicated and which are primarily civil in nature, no case for forgery is made out and accordingly the applicant no.1 has no criminal history whereas the applicant no.2 was involved in two cases, the details of which have been mentioned in paragraph-13 of the bail application and in both the cases the applicant no.2 has been acquitted. In the aforesaid circumstances, it is prayed that the applicants be enlarged on bail.

The learned counsel for the complainant as well as the learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application. It is submitted that the first information report was lodged after taking into consideration the various orders including the order passed by the High Court wherein the earlier order passed in favour of the applicants were set aside. In the aforesaid circumstances, prima facie, the offence is made out against the applicants and they are not entitled to bail.

Considering the rival submissions, the facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record as well as considering the nature of allegations and accusation against the applicant, the severity of the punishment if convicted and the period of incarceration as well as the fact that no apprehension has been expressed by the learned AGA that the applicants are at the risk of fleeing justice or that he would tamper with evidence or influence any witness, hence, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail.

Let the applicants Balveer Singh and Ranveer Singh involved in Case Crime No.67 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 2/3 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station Pali, District Hardoi be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

At the time of executing required sureties the following conditions shall be imposed in the interest of justice.

(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law.

(v) The applicants shall neither influence any witness nor tamper with any evidence after their release.

(vi) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

(vii) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel or the party concerned.

(viii) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

Order Date :- 6.4.2021

ank