Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8624 of 2018 Applicant :- Kailash Chandra Sati Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Satish Kumar Tyagi,Shikhar Awasthi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abhai Kumar Singh,Alok Kumar Kushwaha,Awadhesh Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Shri Shikhar Awasthi, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Alok Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel appearing for the informant.
As per the allegation in the first information report, number of agreements have been entered into by the informant with the applicant for purchasing different properties. The allegation is that despite agreement none of the properties were sold in favour of the informant. One property was sold, which was later found to be mortgaged with some bank and even the name of the informant was not mutated over the same. It has been alleged that the applicant has duped the informant of the amount paid as advance sale consideration.
Per contra learned counsel for the informant has argued that there was relationship of trust between the parties and they used to reside together at one point of time and applicant had taken undue advantage of the trust built together. The applicant has misappropriated lakhs of Rupees of the informant withdrawn from his Provident Fund and Gratuity Account. Learned counsel for the informant has brought on record the transactions between the parties by way of Supplementary Affidavit.
After going through the material on record it appears that the parties were in relationship of close trust and number of property dealings have been done by the parties together. It appears that subsequently something has happened and their relationships has come to an end. The large amount of transactions between the parties show that there was commercial relation also between the parties and in the present proceedings applicant cannot be directed to deposit any amount since most of the allegations are of cash payment. The veracity of these payments can only be determined by the trial court during trial. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit and is in jail since 6.12.2017.
Keeping in view the fact that the informant is a senior citizen, trial court is expected to conclude the trial expeditiously.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Kailash Chandra Sati involved in Case Crime No.659 of 2016, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, I.P.C, Police Station Indrapuram, District Ghaziabad be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected of the commission of which they are suspected.
5. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.
Order Date :- 31.8.2018 T. Sinha