Court No. - 89
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 84 of 2021 Applicant :- Jagdish Mishra @ Raju Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. Alok Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record.
2. This bail application has been filed by applicant Jagdish Mishra @ Raju seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.98 of 2018, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Fazalganj, District Kanpur Nagar during pendency of trial in the above mentioned case crime number.
3. Perusal of record shows that in respect of an incident which occurred on 27.6.2018, a delayed F.I.R. dated 3.8.2018 was lodged by Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Fazalganj Branch namedly Mohit Shri, which was registered as Case Crime No.98 of 2018, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Fazalganj, District Kanpur Nagar. In the aforesaid F.I.R., one Harikesh Singh was nominated as named accused. As per prosecution story as unfolded in F.I.R., it is alleged that a sum of Rs.39,000/- was withdrawn from the bank by using a forged cheque.
4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in above mentioned case crime number. Applicant is not named in the F.I.R. It is then contended that co-accused Aditya Shukla, who was not named in the F.I.R. has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 10.11.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.39105 of 2020. Copy of aforesaid bail order is on record at page 29 of the paper book. The case of present applicant is similar and identical to aforesaid co- accused. Except for the confessional statement of named accused Harikesh Singh, there is no other evidence against the applicant. Applicant is in jail since 9.1.2019. As such applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant.
6. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
7. Let the applicant- Jagdish Mishra @ Raju be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
8. However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.
Order Date :- 6.1.2021 Anil K. Sharma