Heard Sri Akhilesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.12 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 411 I.P.C. and Section 66 I.T.Act, Police Station Paniara, District Maharajganj during the pendency of trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to some ulterior motive, the F.I.R. was lodged by informant against unknown persons with the allegation that in the ATM Cabin of Punjab National Bank the ATM Card of informant was exchanged by three unknown persons fraudulently in which the name of Rajendra Prasad has been mentioned. It is further submitted that all the accused has got arrested by the police on the basis of information received from the informant (Mukhbir). It is next submitted that two ATM Cards and 55 Sim Cards are alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant for which there is no independent witness and none of the ATM Card belongs to the informant, the ATM Card of the informant was recovered from the co-accused, Manoj Kanojia. It is also contended that on the confession statement of co-accused Manoj Kanojia the applicant was implicated in the present case. No efforts were made by the police to conduct identification parade in order to connect the applicant with this case, the offence is triable by Magistrate. Lastly it is contended that the applicant is in jail since 12.01.2021 having no criminal history to his credit as stated in paragraph no.3 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let the applicant, Manish Modanwal, who is involved in aforesaid crime 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 attend and co-operate the trial proceedings 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.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
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 :- 19.8.2021 S.P.