Allahabad High Court
Mani Ram vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 2 March, 2023
Bench: Rajeev Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9032 of 2022
Applicant :- Mani Ram
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Lalji Yadav,Abhijeet Bharti,Arun Sinha,Siddhartha Sinha
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.209 of 2015, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Section 13(1)d, 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station - Mohammadpur Khala, District Barabanki, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case and he is in jail since 28.6.2022. He further submitted that alleged offences are of the year 2007 and F.I.R. in question was lodged in the year 2015. He further submitted that he was not taken into custody during the course of investigation, thereafter, charge sheet was filed and applicant filed petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. which was dismissed with the liberty to appear before the court below and prayed for the benefit of judgment of Satendra Antil. He further submitted that applicant was moved bail application before the court below and the same was rejected. He further submitted that applicant never misused the liberty granted by the writ court as well as Investigating Officer. He further submitted that applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submitted that during the course of investigation, sufficient evidence was found against the applicant but he does not dispute this fact that during the course of investigation, applicant was not taken into custody.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, contents of F.I.R., other relevant documents, nature of offence as well as facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant - Mani Ram - be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
(ii) 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.
(v) 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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.
(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.
Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously without giving any adjournment to either of the parties.
Order Date :- 2.3.2023
Gaurav/-
