Court No. - 23
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11228 of 2018 Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Khelawan Tiwari,Anshul Tiwari,Vikram Singh Shrivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filled on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.
Heard Sri R.K.Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of her prayer for bail submits that he has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that nothing incriminating material has been recovered from the possession of the application and there is no independent witness of the alleged incident. It is also contended that the applicant is store keeper in the Electricity Department in question. During the course of audit shortage/missing of some electric appliances was detected which was in the possession of the applicant, who was over all In charge of Store Section as such the present FIR has been lodged against him by the department/employer. A departmental proceeding has also been initiated against the applicant and in pursuance thereof he has been suspended. It would be double jeopardy if the applicant is punished for the offence allegedly committed by him. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has approached this Court by means of filing Writ Petition No.1116 of 2018 in which on 10.1.2018 this Court had directed for conclusion of the enquiry within a reasonable period. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.1.2018. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and without entering into the suspension order, this Court thinks it proper that no fruitful purpose would be served, if the applicant is kept behind the bar. Further, considering this aspect of the matter, it would be appropriate and relevant to enlarge the applicant on bail in this case.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Ajay Kumar involved in Case Crime No. 3524 of 2017, under section 409 IPC,, P.S. Lalitpur, District Lalitpurr be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.
2. He will not tamper with the witnesses.
3. He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.
It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
Order Date :- 28.3.2018 IA