Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13451 of 2018 Applicant :- Anand Tibrewal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Chaddha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramesh Chandra Mishra
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Learned A.G.A. has filed short counter affidavit and the learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit as well as rejoinder affidavit. All the affidavits are taken on record..
Learned counsel for the applicant prays that he may be permitted to correct the prayer made in the bail application.
Let necessary correction be carried out in the bail application.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that due to some miscommunication between him and his client, he stated that the marriage of the daughter of the applicant is to be solemnized on 29.4.2018, in fact, the marriage of his sister's daughter which is to be solemnized on 29.4.2018 and he has apologized for the same.
Heard Shri Rajeev Chaddha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, Sri Ramesh Chandra Mishra, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri Vikas Sahai, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant was named in the FIR but subsequently during the course of investigation the names of one Sri Shashi Bhushan Mishra, SHO of the concerned police station and Sri Satyanarayan Yadav, Investigating Officer of the criminal case which was between the applicant and complainant, have come into light. The final report which was filed is stated to have been destroyed by the police personnel and thereafter charge-sheet was submitted in the said case against the complainant. He submitted that against Sri Shashikant Prajapati, Circle Officer who was named in the FIR along with the applicant, investigation is pending against him as well as against Sri Shashi Bhushan Mishra, SHO and Satyanarayan Yadav, Investigating Officer. Hence the prosecution case as set out in the FIR appears to be a false one as allegation does not find corroboration. He further submitted that there was some inimical relationship between the petitioner and the complainant of the case and between them series of litigations are going on and charge-sheet in the present case has been submitted against the petitioner only though investigation against the police personnel is still pending. He is languishing in jail since 22.03.2018.
The learned A.G.A. has also filed an affidavit of Superintendent of Police, District Gorakhpur who has also admitted the fact in the short counter affidavit that the investigation with respect to the said police personnel is still pending.
Learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the sentence awardable to the applicant, we are of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let the applicant Anand Tibrewal involved in Special Session Trial No.263 of 2016 arising out of Case Crime No. 131 of 2016 under sections 420, 120B IPC and section 8 Prevention of Corruption Act, P.S. Kotwali, District Maharajganj pending in the court of Special Judge, P.C. Act, 5th, Gorakhpur be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two heavy sureties of Rs. Rs.1,00,000/- (out of which one should a family member) to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(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 applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fail 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 applicants are 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.
However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the aforesaid case and conclude the same on day to day basis strictly in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 309 Cr.P.C. within a further period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
Let a copy of this order be provided to the learned counsel for the applicant within twenty four hours.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 25.4.2018 AU