Allahabad High Court
Devendra Pratap Singh @ Gabbar Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. on 23 May, 2025
Author: Manish Mathur
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:30801
Court No. - 13
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4526 of 2025
Applicant :- Devendra Pratap Singh @ Gabbar Singh
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Amar Singh,Brij Mohan Sahai
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra learned counsel for informant whose power filed today is taken on record. Supplementary affidavit filed today is also taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the complainant/ informant.
3. This first bail application has been filed with regard to FIR/ Case Crime No.415 of 2023 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC, Police Station Dargah Sharif, District Bahraich.
4. As per contents of FIR, applicant is said to have abducted the husband of informant who was not recovered ever since. Allegation levelled is for the purposes of securing bail for the applicant, a forged death certificate was prepared for the purposes of utilization in Case Crime No. 323 of 2021.
5. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him which would be evident from the fact that there is no allegation levelled against the applicant with regard to committing forgery for the purposes of preparation or obtaining death certificate of husband of informant. It is submitted that applicant's name has in fact been introduced only on the basis of alleged confessional statement of co-accused who have indicated applicant as being instrumental in preparation of the forged death certificate. It is submitted that applicant's previous criminal history has been explained and he is under incarceration since 05.02.2022 with trial is at the stage of inception.
6. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail application. Learned counsel for the informant has drawn attention to the fact that it is upon directions issued by this Court in the Criminal Revision No.1107 of 2023, Devendra Singh @ Gabbar Singh versus State of U.P. and another, vide order dated 06.10.2023 that the present FIR has been lodged clearly indicating a prima facie satisfaction that the death certificate of husband of informant was allegedly forged. Investigation with regard thereto was also directed. He has also adverted to statement of co-accused - Anil Kumar, who was the Nagar Palika employee. who in his statement has clearly named the applicant as being instrumental in forgery of death certificate of husband of informant, Arun Kumar.
7. It is, therefore, submitted that it is in fact the applicant who is the mastermind with regard to such forgery which is being used for various purposes to obtain benefit from disappearance of the said Arun Kumar. It is also submitted that it is the applicant who is inducing other persons to file affidavits before various courts concerned with the said forged death certificate being annexed. It is also submitted that, however, in the civil litigation, the said death certificate is not being used and the applicant is indicating the said Arun Kumar be alive.
8. Learned counsel for the informant has also drawn attention to the anticipatory bail order passed in the case of one Mukesh Pratap Singh in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.1809 of 2024 to indicate that anticipatory bail to the said co-accused has been granted primarily on the submission of learned counsel for the applicant therein that it is in fact the co-accused Ravindra Singh, who was instrumental in preparation of the alleged forged certificate.
9. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :-
"21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty."
"27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution."
10. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties, prima facie, subject to evidence being led in trial, at this stage it appears that primary gist of allegation levelled in the FIR is with regard to abduction of husband of informant, Arun Kumar, who is said to have been abducted by applicant. It appears that the applicant's name has been introduced on the basis of directions issued by this Court in Criminal Revision No.1107 of 2023, whereafter co-accused - Anil Kumar is said to have taken the name of applicant specifically for the purposes of preparation of forged death certificate of the husband of informant. It is admitted between the parties that the trial in the present case is at the summoning stage while applicant is under incarceration since 26.07.2024. Criminal history of applicant has been explained.
11. From a perusal of material on record and submissions advanced, it appears that primary gist of allegation levelled against the applicant is of abduction of the husband of informant which was registered as case crime No. 323 of 2021 and in which applicant has already been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 13521 of 2022. The only role attributed to the applicant at this stage is of his involvement in the preparation and procurement of the alleged forged death certificate of the husband of informant. The aspect as to whether the said death certificate is forged or not would be subject matter of evidence during the course of trial. The FSL report has only indicated the aspect that the allegation for the purposes of obtaining the death certificate does not bear the signatures of informant.
12. In such circumstances, at this stage, it is difficult to indicate the role of applicant in the forgery which has been alleged. The applicant is under incarceration since 05.02.2024 with trial at the summoning stage.
13. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.
14. Accordingly bail application is allowed.
15. Let applicant- Devendra Pratap Singh @ Gabbar Singh involved in the aforesaid 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) 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.
(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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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.
Order Date :- 23.5.2025
prabhat
