Allahabad High Court
Rakesh Ahirwar vs State Of U.P. on 9 May, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:99232
Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19386 of 2023
Applicant :- Rakesh Ahirwar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Singh,Prakash Chandra Gupta
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dinesh Kumar Singh,Indra Pal Singh Rajpoot
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Ashish Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Shiv Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Indra Pal Singh Rajpoot, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Rohit Dubey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.436 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 506, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Mahoba, District Mahoba, during the pendency of trial.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have duped the informant to the tune of Rs.20 lakhs on the pretext that four members of his family shall be given a job at Forest Department, Bhopal as Class-IV employee.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. Learned counsel has further stated that the said Rs.99,000/- has not been transferred by the informant to the account of the applicant rather it has been transferred by the co-accused person Preetam Ahirwar. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 04.04.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
6. Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the co-accused person Preetam Lal Ahirwar has been enlarged on bail on the ground that the amount of Rs.99,000/- has been transferred to the account of the applicant, as such he is not entitled for bail. Learned counsel for the informant has further stated that there is a videographic recording of the said deal between the applicant and the informant. The informant is a retired employee and he has been duped of his hard earned money. Learned A.G.A. has also vehemently opposed the bail application.
7. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825, taking into consideration the fact that the said transaction itself cannot be termed to be a fair transaction between the parties, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant- Rakesh Ahirwar, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 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.
(ii) 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.
(iii) 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.
(iv) 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.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
10. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
(Krishan Pahal, J.)
Order Date :- 9.5.2023
Ravi Kant
