Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22691 of 2019 Applicant :- Atul Kumar Srivastava Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Maniji Bakhshi,Adarsh Bhushan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Adarsh Bhushan, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Archana Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was posted as Assistant Consolidation Officer in Consolidation Department. He is an honest officer and delivering his service in the said department since 1989, i.e., for about 30 years. He has not been given any adverse entry nor any departmental proceedings has ever been initiated against him. The applicant has not been involved in any other criminal case. He submits that so far as present case is concerned, the applicant was called upon at police station Chawani on the pretext of some enquiry as some case was registered against him. Thereafter, the applicant was trapped and all the proceedings took place in question took place at the police station Chawani itself. He submits that no occurrence took place at the office of the applicant or anywhere else as has been alleged in the F.I.R. He submits that the complainant Vijay Prakash Shukla is an influential and notorious Advocate in the locality having good political approach. During the consolidation proceeding, the applicant gave a report on 23.10.2018 to the Consolidation Officer Munderwa. In the said report it was specifically stated that the land as has been claimed by the complainant varied from Form-41 and Form-45 and said discrepancy was not explained by the complainant as to how the previous entries differed from last entries resulting increase in area of land of the complainant. In the said report it is stated by the applicant that the additional land shown to be of the complainant be deducted and included in Gram Sabha land as Naveen Parti. It is submitted that if the applicant be a dishonest Officer, he could have never given adverse report against the complainant to the concerned Consolidation Officer. Relying on the report of the applicant Consolidation Officer passed an order on 24.10.2018 itself whereby from the land situated in Gata No. 117 rakba 0.240 hactare belongs to the complainant was deleted and it was recorded as a Naveen Parti of gram sabha land. On this account the complainant had ill will and grudge against the applicant and Consolidation Officer, hence the complainant exercise his influence in the police department and got the applicant falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is an innocent, person and entire trap proceedings have been initiated by the complainant to create undue pressure over the Consolidation Authorities in order to get his file decided by Consolidation Officer in his favour and to teach a lesson to the applicant for giving adverse report against him.The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent. The applicant is in jail since 22.2.2019.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
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 tampering 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 Atul Kumar Srivastava involved in Case Crime No. 50 of 2019 under section 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act, police station Chawani, District Basti be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. One lac with two sureties (Out of which one should be of his family member) 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.
The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 30.5.2019 Shiraz