Allahabad High Court
Devendra Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. ... on 26 August, 2022
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Pachori
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 15
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8144 of 2022
Applicant :- Devendra Singh
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy./Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Paavan Awasthi,Ayodhya Prasad Mishra A.P. Mishra,Prashast Puri,Rituraj Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard Sri Ayodhya Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vijay Prakash Dwivedi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant Devendra Singh under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 119 of 2022, under Sections 409, 406, 420 & 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station- Chowk, District- Lucknow, during pendency of the trial.
As per the allegation of F.I.R. dated 11.05.2022 which has been lodged under Section 406, 420, 120-B I.P.C. against the four named persons for cheating the consumers of life insurance company with regard to the payment of policies which have been lapsed or GST which have been incurred thereon.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and applicant has no concerned with the Axa Insurance Company. He is not an employee or official of this company. It is further submitted that the applicant is consultant of EDECD Company. The applicant is not any beneficiary of the alleged amount mentioned in the F.I.R. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of applicant. Alleged recovery of 15 Pan Cards, Debit Card, 9 ATM Cards, Aadhar Card, DL, RC and 4 Sim Cards of different operators and cash amount of Rs. 2,610/- and a mobile phone without complying the mandatory provisions of Section 100 Cr.P.C. There is no public or independent witness of the alleged recovery. The other six co-accused persons who have been arrested with the applicant have been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is further submitted that the applicant has been implicated in two other cases in which in one case he has been granted bail and in the other he is on interim bail.
It is next contended that there is no other criminal antecedent to his credit. It is next submitted that there is also no possibility of the applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. The applicant, who is languishing in jail since 30.04.2022 undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the court below and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant. He further submits that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
It is a settled law that while granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of the evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, his role and involvement in the offence, his involvement in other cases and reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with.
Taking into account the totality of facts and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors., v. Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh & Ors., (2002) 3 SCC 598, Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee & Anr., (2010) 14 SCC 496 and Mahipal v. Rajesh Kumar & Anr., (2020) 2 SCC 118, the larger interest of the public/State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, the present bail application is allowed.
Let applicant, Devendra Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:
(i) 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 her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) 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 of Cr.P.C.
(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 the trial court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
(vi) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that 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 in accordance with law.
The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavor and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the applicant, if there is no other legal impediment.
It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
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 :- 26.8.2022/VPS
