Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45995 of 2019 Applicant :- Nadeem Ahmad Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Zafar Abbas, Mohammad Iliyas Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The submission is that from the allegations made in the FIR no offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC is made out against the applicant. It has further been submitted that for the offences under Section 3 and 6 of Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act, at the most punishment of 3 years and fine which may extend to Rs. 1,000/-, or with both, can be imposed upon the applicant. It has further been submitted that for offence under Section 20 and 25 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1855 maximum sentence of 3 years, or fine or both can be imposed upon the accused. Regarding offences under Sections 65, 66, 66B, 66C, 66D and 66F of Indian Technology Act the maximum punishment is 3 years and also fine. Regarding offence under Section 66F of the Information Technology Act, 2000 counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated under this section. The Investigating Officer has not been able to collect any evidence regarding the alleged offence to justify the implication of the applicant under the aforesaid provision of the Act. It is a case of false implication. The recovery of electronic goods from the applicant do not proves that they were being used for illegal purposes. Such goods are found in the market and the number of simcards have been shown in the FIR which most of the companies provide to the customers without payment of any cost. It has been submitted that the applicant has been implicated in the case without reliable evidence against him. The applicant is in jail since 02.02.2019 and has criminal history of only one case, apart from this case under section 2/3 of Gangsters Act.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.
After considering the rival submissions noted hereinabove, larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the material brought on record and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let the applicant- Nadeem Ahmad, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 40 of 2019, under Sections- 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 3/6 Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933 & Section 4/20/25 of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and Sections 65, 66, 66-B, 66C, 66D, 66F I.T. Act, Police Station- Mauaima, District- Allahabad be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with 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 :-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Trial court will make all efforts to conclude the trial against the applicant within a period of one year.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 Rohit