Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32018 of 2021 Applicant :- Imran Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Irfan,Chandra Bhan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard Sri Mohd. Irfan 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. 176 of 2021, under Sections 386, 420, 507 IPC and 66D, 67 I.T. Act, Police Station Milak, District - Rampur with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
The FIR was lodged on 24.05.2021 by complainant Suresh Gangwar against an unknown person. Along with the complaint photocopies of whats-app and chatting were annexed. It was mentioned in the FIR that on the whats-app number of the complainant objectionable photographs (naked) were sent and Rs. 20,000/- were demanded from the complainant. It was also alleged in the FIR that threatening was also given to send the objectionable video to the Superintendent of Police, Rampur. The complainant showed his inability to credit the demanded amount of money. However, he credited a sum of Rs. 1500/- into the given account number. Still he was given threatening by unknown and unidentified caller (lady) that the complainant's life will be ruined and endangered by doing viral of his videos and photographs.
The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused is quite innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the present accused applicant deserves for bail on the ground of parity with co-accused persons Mustaqeem an Ameer, who have already been granted bail by another Bench of this Court as well as by this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.31705 of 2021 on 7.10.2021 and in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.32109 of 2021 on 18.10.2021, copies of the order have been produced which are taken on record. It is also argued that the alleged offence under Sections 386, 420, 507 IPC and 66D, 67 I.T. Act is triable by the Court of Magistrate. The allegation levelled upon the present applicant is false, as there is no cogent evidence against the applicant to connect him with the alleged offence. Further submission is that there was no extortion committed by the present applicant by putting the complainant in fear of death. Lastly, it is argued that the applicant is in jail since 27.5.2021 and that in case he is enlarged on bail, there appears no likelihood to 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 Mustaqeem and Ameer, who have already been granted bail by another Bench, vide order dt. 7.10.2021, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 31705 of 2021 (Mustaqeem Vs. State of U.P.) and by this Court vide order datrd 18.10.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.32109 of 2021.
Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, period of detention of the applicant, considering that the applicant has no criminal history, and all the 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 Imran 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 :- 26.10.2021 AU