Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32436 of 2018 Applicant :- Mayank Saxena Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shad Khan,Mumtaz Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Madhuranjan Panday
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Shri Shad Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Madhuranjan Pandey, learned counsel for the informant.
In the FIR there is allegation that an amount of Rs.2,09,041/- of the informant is due against the applicant, which he is not paying. The parties had commercial relation and the money is due regarding certain transaction by the informant.
Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is willing to pay the aforesaid amount to the informant, in case he produces relevant receipts and vouchers.
Learned counsel for the informant has no objection and is willing to furnish the receipts/vouchers of the aforesaid amount to the applicant.
On the other hand learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail.
After hearing the parties it is, hereby, directed that the applicant shall produce a demand draft of Rs.2,09,041/- along with interest @ 7% before the C.J.M. concerned within three months and after the informant produces the bills/vouchers/receipts before the C.J.M. concerned, the receipt/voucher shall be handed over to the applicant and the demand draft along with interest @ 7% in the name of the informant shall be handed over to the informant by the C.J.M. concerned. The applicant is directed to be enlarged on bail for a period of three months during which the aforesaid exercise shall be completed by the parties. On failure of the applicant to deposit the demand draft as aforesaid, this bail order shall stand cancelled and the applicant shall be taken into custody forthwith. It is further provided that in case the order is complied by the applicant, his bail shall be extended till the disposal of the trial. The deposit of the aforesaid amount shall be without prejudice to the rights of the parties to contest the trial as per their case set up by the trial court.
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 Mayank Saxena involved in Case Crime No.226 of 2017, under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 and 471, I.P.C. and Section 66, I.T. Act, Police Station Sungarhi, District Pilibhit 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 :- 28.8.2018 T. Sinha