Court No. - 24
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30010 of 2017 Applicant :- Athar @ Atthar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Virendra Kumar,Sunil Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amit Kumar Srivastava,Pratik J. Nagar,Priyanka Tripathi,Santosh Tiwari,Vivek Tripathi
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has not committed any offence. F.I.R. was not lodged against the applicant, but against the informant of the matter. Referring to the supplementary affidavit, it is argued that Mahant Satya Swaroop Shastri himself has admitted in his statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. that he has executed the sale deed of an area 300 sq. yards in the matter. At this stage, learned counsel has referred to annexure no.3 to the supplementary affidavit and argued that in the Original Suit No. 141 of 2013, an interim injunction was granted by the court concerned in favour of the applicant. Informant at one point of time admitted the execution of the sale deed, but at another point of time, he denied the facts. Thus, it is argued that allegations were levelled against the applicant at belated stage only to grab the money. Area for which no sale deed was executed was also given under the possession of the applicant on the basis of rent note. It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 20.5.2017. In case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
On the other hand, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that in the F.I.R., although applicant is not named as an accused, but during investigation, on the application made by the informant, charge-sheet was submitted against the applicant. A prima facie case is made out against the applicant. If the applicant is released on bail, he will leave the country and the consideration amount of the sale deed will not be returned back. It is further submitted that the sale deed was executed impersonating the informant. Active role has been assigned to the applicant. He was the main conspirator. Civil Suit has also been filed by the applicant. This fact itself shows that applicant has actively participated in the crime.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Athar @ Atthar involved in Case Crime No. 223-C of 2013 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Sadar Bazar, District Saharanpur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties (not less than rupees ten lacs) 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 shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court concerned.
2. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
3. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
4. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
5. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
6. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
Order Date :- 30.5.2018 ss