Allahabad High Court
Jagdish Prasad vs State Of U.P. on 20 May, 2024
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:90646
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30228 of 2023
Applicant :- Jagdish Prasad
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Rai
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Amit Rai, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.M. Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.378 of 2022, under Sections 420, 406, 417 and 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Dhampur, District Bijnor, during the pendency of trial.
4. As per prosecution story, the named accused persons, namely, Shilpi Dixit, Dr. Prince Gupta and Amit Saxena, are stated to have duped several persons stating that they shall be accorded a profit of 40-50% after completion of the period of their money bonds.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is not named in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR itself mentions the applicant and one Mohd. Faizi to be some persons who are being falsely indicated to be the directors in the company. The applicant himself is a victim and was an agent in the company. He has himself instituted FIR No.337 of 2022 against the directors of the company who have been named in the instant FIR. Learned counsel has further stated that the criminal history of six cases assigned to the applicant stands explained as in four of those cases, he has been enlarged on bail. One case has been quashed and in one another case under Gangsters Act, he has yet to apply for bail.
6. In support of his submission, learned counsel has placed much reliance upon the judgment of Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of U.P. And Another, 2020 (11) SCC 648, wherein the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case for bail is made out.
7. 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. The applicant is languishing in jail since 23.03.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
8. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.
9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, 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.
10. Let the applicant- Jagdish Prasad, 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 not tamper with evidence.
(ii) 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.
11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
12. 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.
Order Date :- 20.5.2024
Ravi/-
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
