Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17823 of 2019 Applicant :- Anil Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Amar Nath Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Rejoinder affidavit filed by the applicant counsel taken on record.
Heard Sri Amar Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amrit Raj Chaurasiya, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is permanent employee in the office of Block Education Officer Officer Maat District Mathura and appointed in year 2007 on the compassionate ground and no any complaint against him since his joining. It is pertinent to mention here that the name of the petitioner included on the basis of participation of the selection process being clerk of the Department during the Investigation on the statement of the Brij Mohan Rana.
It is further submitted that from the perusal of the first information report no any allegation against the applicant in relates to the illegal appointment of the Education Department but during the investigation the name of the applicant included by the Police authority without any evidence and arrested the applicant along with Brij Mohan Rana on 15.12.2018. No any independent witness has taken the name of the applicant during his statement except Brij Mohan Rana who is working along with applicant in the same department, it is relevant to mention here that in the same matter 3 FIR has been lodged in which one Mahesh Sharma office Assistant Basic Shiksha Officer Mathura was main accused who released on bail by this Hon'ble Court along with other co-accused bearing bail application No. 1337 of 2019 (Mahesh Sharma vs. State of U.P.) in Case Crime No. 837 of 2018 and other co-accused namely, Mohit Bhardwaj, Radha Kishan, Payal Sharma, Bhupendra Kumar obtained bail from the Additional Session Judge Court No. 1, Mathura.
It has been next contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is not named in the FIR and similarly situated co-
accused Brijmohan Rana has been granted bail by this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 19739 of 2019 vide order dated 24.05.2019 and case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. Besides the present case there is one more case against the applicant in which he has been granted bail by this court today in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 18588 of 2019 Anil Kumar vs. State of U.P. He is in jail since 15.12.2018.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and 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, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant Anil Kumar involved in Case Crime No. 678 of 2018 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 13 (1) (A) r/w 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Mathura 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.
(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 :- 31.5.2019 Rohit