Allahabad High Court
Rohit Pandey @ Rohit Kumar Pandey vs State Of U.P. on 18 January, 2021
Bench: Vikas Kunvar Srivastav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 30
Case :- BAIL No. - 421 of 2021
Applicant :- Rohit Pandey @ Rohit Kumar Pandey
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Verma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vikas Kunvar Srivastav,J.
The case is called out in revised call of the list.
Learned counsel for the bail-applicant Sri Atul Verma, Advocate and learned A.G.A. for the State Sri S.P. Tiwari, Advocate are present in the Court.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of bail-applicant-Rohit Pandey @ Rohit Kumar Pandey, who is involved in Case Crime No.27 of 2020, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 506 of I.P.C. and Sections 7/13 of P.C. Act, registered at Police Station Cantt, District Lucknow.
The occasion of present bail application has arisen on rejection of bail plea of the bail-applicant by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, P.C. Act, Court No.3, Lucknow vide order dated 06.03.2020. A copy of the bail application has already been provided in the office of learned G.A.
Learned counsel for the bail-applicant Sri Atul Verma, Advocate read over the first information report lodged against the accused-applicant by the victim of the offence, the complainant and submitted that the present accused-applicant is falsely implicated as the victim himself is selected crossing the medical test and written test in the recruitment and presently employed in the army. So far as the transaction of money is concerned, this is not related with the offence.
Learned counsel for the bail-applicant submits that the offence is compoundable at the instance of victim and according to his instructions, the accused-applicant is ready and willing to make good, the payment of alleged amount, involved in the offence to the victim.
Subject to the payment of amount in question i.e. Rs.1,69,000/- in the Court, learned counsel submits that the accused may be released on bail with other conditions ensuring his presence during the trial so that he may be able to put his evidences in defence properly.
Learned A.G.A. for the State submits that he has received the instructions, according to which, the offence under Section 7/13 of P.C. Act in addition to the charges under Sections 406, 419, 420, 506 of I.P.C. is found established against the accused-applicant. Learned A.G.A. further submits that the investigation is completed and chargesheet is submitted on 14.05.2020.
Learned A.G.A. has not rebutted the facts that the complainant-victim of the alleged offence is recruited and working in the army after successfully competing the medical and written test therefor.
Learned counsel for the bail-applicant in the reply submitted that neither the offence under Section 419 and 420 I.P.C. are made out. The applicant has never forged post for the purpose of obtaining valuable security as a person to him. The accused-applicant believed to be an officer in the military. Moreover, from the possession of the applicant, the money was also not recovered as alleged by the prosecution.
After hearing learned counsels for the parties in the case, since the complainant is selected in recruitment process and employed in the army after passing the medical and written test for the recruitment on his own, therefore, the allegations as to the receiving money in lieu of helping him in the recruitment by otherwise means to pass the medical and written examination is a matter of evidence. Moreover, the complainant seems himself, a person likely to believe in otherwise means for getting benefits and advantages over others who are competing with him in the recruitment test. Allegations at this stage prima facie can not be believed. However, since the accused-applicant is ready and willing to get compounded the offence by payment of money, therefore, his personal liberty may be ensured to enable him for appearing in trial so as to efficaciously put his defence before the Court by adducing evidences.
In view of the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors. reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, the accused-applicant may be released subject to the fulfillment of his assurance by paying the amount in question i.e. Rs.1,69,000/- in the Court within four weeks and submitting himself to the trial before the Court concerned.
On the aforesaid undertaking of learned counsel for the bail-applicant, let the bail-applicant-Rohit Pandey @ Rohit Kumar Pandey, involved in Case Crime No.27 of 2020, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 506 of I.P.C. and Sections 7/13 of P.C. Act, registered at Police Station Cantt, District Lucknow be released on bail subject to the payment of Rs.1,69,000/- in the Court within four weeks from the date of release from jail and on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(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.
Order Date :- 18.1.2021
Saurabh
