Allahabad High Court
Ram Babu Sachan vs State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 16 January, 2023
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 12
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1995 of 2022
Applicant :- Ram Babu Sachan
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And 2 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Jagdish Pratap Pandey,Amar Jit Singh Bisen,Santosh Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
The applicant has moved the present application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying for grant of anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.231 of 1997 under sections 409, 418, 420, 466, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. and section 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, P.S. Panki, districct Kanpur.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is a retired employee of Kanpur Development Authority. He has retired in the year 2013. The incident pertains to the year 1983, involving a loss of Rs.31,325/-. The first information report was lodged in the year 1997 and the charge sheet has been filed in the year 2006.
He further draws attention of the court towards the finding of a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.85(S/B) of 2002 Ravindra Kumar Sharma versus Inspector General/Additional Director General, Economic Offences Wing Lucknow and others, which is reproduced as below :
"Looking to the facts noted above, it is, therefore, obvious that the apprehension of the petitioner is perfectly justified that the First Information Report against him dated 17.1.2001 is without any justification. This First information Report, therefore, is liable to be quashed against the petitioner only. The Economic Offences Wing ought to have submitted its report to the State Government as was required by letter dated 17.9.1998 if there was any material against the petitioner in the said inquiry report."
Learned counsel further submits that after this finding of the Division Bench, the Economic Offences Wing should have submitted its report to the State Govt and should not have lodged the first information report directly. It is submitted that the petitioner is almost 70 years old and a retired officer of the Development Authority, having no criminal antecedent.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer made by the applicant's counsel, however, he does not dispute the fact that the applicant has cooperated during investigation.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and having no criminal antecedents, the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial, the incident pertains to the year 1983 and the charge sheet has been filed in 2006, old age of the petitioner and gravity of offence, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case in the light of judgment of Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, subject to his cooperation in the trial.
In view of the above as also keeping in view of the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC OnLine 98, the accused applicant is directed to surrender before trial court if he is summoned to face trial for offence in question after filing of the charge sheet. The accused applicant Ram Babu Sachan shall be released on bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court, with 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or tamper with the evidence;
(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;
Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.
It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
In view of the aforesaid, the anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 16.1.2023
kkb/
