Allahabad High Court
Ravindra Kumar vs State Of U.P. on 12 April, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Reserved On:- 29.03.2023
Delivered On:- 12.04.2023
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12342 of 2023
Applicant :- Ravindra Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Praveen Kumar Singh,Syed Imran Ibrahim
Hon'ble Siddharth, J.
1. Heard Sri Vivek Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Praveen Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.
2. There is allegation against the applicant and two co-accused in the FIR that co-accused, Ravindra Lal, met the informant and informed that the applicant and Ranjeet Kumar are doing plotting of land. The applicant is alleged to be Director of Vishal Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. The informant paid Rs. 1,25,000/- from the account of his wife through R.T.G.S in the Union Bank account of applicant and Rs. 2,50,000/- in cash at the house of Ravindra Kumar. Cheque of Rs. 2 lakhs was also handed over to the applicant. Rs. 4,25,000/- was sent through R.T.G.S in the account of the applicant thereafter 20 lakhs were given to him on 14.04.2018. Total amount of Rs. 30 lakhs was paid to him and when he requested the applicant to execute sale deed after taking remaining amount, he stated that he has executed agreement in favour of some other person regarding the land shown to the informant. Hence, the FIR was lodged.
3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the company of the applicant is under Corporate Insolvency Resolution and Bankruptcy Board of India. He has criminal history of 22 cases and is in jail since 19.11.2019. Unless the assets of company are liquidated, no payment can be made to the investors.
4. Counsel for the applicant has relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Bimla Tiwari vs. State of Bihar and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 47, and has stated that bail cannot be denied, only because the accused is not willing to return the amount. Recovery of money lies within the realm of civil procedure.
5. Learned A.G.A has also opposed the submissions made on behalf of the applicant.
6. After considering the rival submissions, this Court is of the view that the applicant has although committed the alleged offences against the applicant and other investors also but right now before conclusion of insolvency proceedings money cannot received by the informant.
7. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicants being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant, Ravindra Kumar, involved in Case Crime No. 918 of 2019, under Sections- 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station- Cantt., District- Varanasi, 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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 applicants fail 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.
(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 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.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the applicant as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one year.
Registrar (Compliance) of this Court is directed to communicate this order to the trial Court for compliance.
Order Date :- 12.04.2023
Rohit
