Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Babu vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|25 October, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42060 of 2021 Applicant :- Babu Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Gajendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 238 of 2021 under Sections 420, 406, 395, 170, 467, 468, 412, 120-B IPC, Police Station - Baradari, District - Bareilly with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
The FIR of this incident was lodged on 02.04.2021 against named accused Santpal and his friend. It was alleged by complainant Arjun Kumar Sah that he runs a jewelry shop at Sisauna in the name of Prahari Verma. The complainant was introduced by his friend to a businessman of gold namely Santpal (applicant), who called out the complainant at railway station to purchase gold weighing 500 grams. But he did not purchase it and came back. Thereafter, on phone the complainant was again informed by the applicant Santpal for purchase of a good stuff (maal). The applicant collected about eight lakhs of rupees and gave to applicant Santpal, who went away on the assurance that he would come back with the gold and also kept two mobile phones in his bag and did not return thereafter. A hectic search for accused Santpal was made by the complainant but his whereabouts could not be traced out. Then, the matter was reported to the police.
The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued by the applicant that the main role has been assigned to co-accused Santpal. It is also argued that the other co-accused who were assigned the similar role as was assigned to the present applicant have already been granted bail and the present accused is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. The bail orders passed in favour of the co-accused are annexed at page No. 41 onward to the paper book of this bail application. It is argued that the applicant is in jail since 04.04.2021 and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. But he accepts the bail parity of the present applicant with co-accused.
Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, period of detention of the applicant, considering the bail parity with the co- accused who have already been granted bail, and considering all other attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let applicant Babu involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
(1). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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;
(2). 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;
(3). In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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 may initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(4). 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the learned counsel for the applicant alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
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 :- 25.10.2021 LBY
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Babu vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
25 October, 2021
Judges
  • Ajit Singh
Advocates
  • Gajendra Pratap Singh