Heard Sri Hari Narayan Singh learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.564 of 2020, under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 409, 411, 120B IPC, P.S. Phase-III, District Gautam Buddha Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to FIR, informant took a franchise of Best Land Trade Pvt. Ltd. Co., in the name of Hyper Super Market and members of the company namely, Manish Kumar Dahiya, Sanjeev Sharma, Kunal Keshav, Ankur, Anshul Sharma, Ashish Joshi, Amardeep and Rohit Yadav, committing fraud, forgery and misappropriated Rs. 23,50,000/- It is next submitted that co-accused namely Manish Kumar Dahiya, has been enlarged on bail by the Apex Court in Criminal Appeal Nos. 830-837 of 2021 vide order dated 16.8.2021. It is also submitted that co-accused Sonam Verma, has also been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19049 of 2021 vide order dated 14.7.2021. The copy of the same has been supplied by the learned counsel for the applicant today in the Court. The case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is in jail since 22.8.2020, and if he is released on bail, there is no chance of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail or tampering with the prosecution witnesses.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let the applicant, Ankur @ Sonu Verma @ Chhotu @ Ajay Sharma @ Anbir @ James Blue @ Ankush Gandhi who is involved in aforesaid 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.
1. The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings 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.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 26.8.2021 Sweety