Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40535 of 2019 Applicant :- Devesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Singh Chahar 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 material on record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 139 of 2019, under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., P.S. Barsana, district-Mathura, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
The first information report was lodged by the informant against eight persons including applicant (seller, purchaser, witnesses of the alleged factitious sale deed), alleging therein that the informant is the owner of Khata no. 498, Khasra no. 422 total area 0.810 hect. It is further alleged that he has sold about 656.59 sq. mtr. to someone and about 153 sq. mtr. was left. It is also alleged that someone has sold his land of Khasra no. 822 and when he got enquired about it from the Registry office, he found that Ram Swaroop, son of Parma, Jagdish, son of Soran and Punit Singh, son of Jagdish have sold his land by impersonating as Manik Chand to his son Punit Singh and Devesh Sharma.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to some ulterior motive. The applicant is the bona fide purchaser of the land and he has purchased the land after paying valuable consideration amount. He next submitted that the alleged sale deed yet has not been declared void by any competent court of law and the sale deed is still valid. He also submitted that the informant has submitted an affidavit before Superintendent of Police, in which it has stated that due to inadvertent mistake of the counsel, who had prepared the deed had written wrong Khasra no. 831 in place of 432 of the land of Ram Swaroop. He also submitted that neither the applicant has committed any fraud nor he duped anybody. Further submission is that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled now. He also submitted that all the offences are triable by the court of Magistrate. He lastly submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 20.7.2019 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that it might be possible due to inadvertent mistake Khasra no. 822 was written in place of Khasra no. 831. He also submitted that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, considering the law laid down in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018(3) SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.
Let the applicant, Devesh involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
1. The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial 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.
It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 30.9.2019 Faridul