Court No. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44271 of 2021 Applicant :- Dharmendra Singh @ Deepak Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jaswant Rai,Sanjay Kumar Ray
Hon'ble Anil Kumar Ojha,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 51 of 2021, under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 506 of I.P.C.
registered at P.S.- Audhogik Kshetra, District- Prayagraj.
As per F.I.R., brief facts of the prosecution are that the informant is a flour mill owner and he has supplied flour to the applicant worth Rs. 96,71,013/- through transport and the applicant paid him only Rs. 68,71,103/- and thereafter stopped the remaining payment amounting to Rs. 28,000,00/-.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has not committed any fraud or cheating with the informant. No agreement has ever been executed between the applicant and informant. The informant himself contacted to the applicant to sell his goods in local market and deputed care taker of the goods and it was agreed that profit will be divided equally between them and it was also agreed that 30% damage would be borne by both by dividing 15% equally. Further submitted that the applicant could not sell the goods provided by the informant due to pandemic of Covid-19 and in the meantime the same was rotten. The allegations levelled against the applicant are fully false and baseless and case under aforesaid Sections is not made out against him. Further submitted that prosecution story is highly improbable and concocted one, upon which no reliance can be placed. The applicant is languishing in jail since 19.08.2021.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail.
Nature of accusation, evidence collected by I.O. in support of the charge, gravity of offence, nature and severity of punishment in case of conviction, complicity of the accused and all other attending circumstances were duly considered.
Perusal of the record reveals that initially the flour was supplied and its price was paid to the informant by the applicant, later on, money to the tune of Rs. 28,000,00/- was not paid to the informant, thus, as initially the price of flour was paid, so prima-facie, it cannot be inferred that there was intention to deceive the informant.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, a case for bail is made out.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Dharmendra Singh @ Deepak involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions;
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
2. The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.
3. During trial, he shall not indulge in any criminal activities.
In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 24.12.2021 VPS