Allahabad High Court
Shyam Behari vs State Of U.P. on 15 July, 2021
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 14
Case :- BAIL No. - 7352 of 2021
Applicant :- Shyam Behari
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Surya Prakash
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the records.
2.The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case Crime No.287 of 2021 under Sections 272 I.PC and Section 60 (2) of Excise Act, Police Station- Nighasan, District- Lakhimpur Kheri.
3.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that accused applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the alleged recovery shown against the applicant is false as there is no independent witness of the same. It is further contended that according to the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Ashok Kumar Sharma, AIRONLINE 2020 SC 704, the Police Officer cannot prosecute offenders with respect to Section 272 I.P.C. as under Section 32 of Act, only Drug Inspector can file complaint. The accused applicant is languishing in jail since 29.05.2021. It is next submitted that the applicant is neither a previous convict nor he has any criminal history. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is lastly submitted that co-accused Bechey Lal @ Bachan Lal has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide its order dated 14.7.2021 passed in Bail Application No.7207 of 2021 and the present applicant is similarly circumstanced to that co-accused.
4.Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
5.Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the contesting parties and having perused the records, there being no independent witness and looking to the statutory provisions, having no criminal history and the fact that the applicant is in jail since 29.05.2021 the Court finds this to be a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
6. Let the applicant Shyam Behari involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties (one should be of his family member/near relative) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) 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.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
(v) 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 CrPC (iv) argument / judgment.
(vi) 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.
(vii) Since the certified copy of this order, in view of the COVID-2019 pandemic, may not be easily available to the applicant, the applicant may file computer generated copy of this order from the official website of this Court and self- attested by the learned counsel for the applicant, before the concerned Magistrate/Court/Authority/Official.
(viii) The concerned Magistrate/Court/Authority/ Official, before accepting such computerized copy, filed by the applicant, as genuine, shall verify its authenticity from the official website of this Court.
(ix) Office is also directed to send a computerized copy of this order to the District Judge concerned through e-mail or the fax, as the case may be, forthwith.
7. It is provided that none of the observations made above shall be considered by the trial court and the trial shall proceed on its own merits.
Order Date :- 15.7.2021
RKM.
