Court No. - 89
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15124 of 2021 Applicant :- Neeraj Mishra Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- P.K. Upadhyay,Vikram Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. O.P. Vishwkarma, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. P.K. Upadhyay, learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.
This application for bail has been filed by applicant Neeraj Mishra, seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 80 of 2017, under sections 406, 420 IPC, Police Station- Chandauli, District Chandauli during the pendency of trial.
Record shows that an F.I.R. dated 31.3.2017 was lodged by first informant Smt. Sukumari Devi and was registered as Case Crime No. 80 of 2017, under sections 406, 420 IPC, Police Station- Chandauli, District Chandauli. In the aforesaid F.I.R., five persons namely, Anil Kumar, Akash Verma, Vijay, Om Prakash and Ravi Verma have been nominated as named accused. As per the allegations made in F.I.R, it is alleged that fraud and forgery has been committed inasmuch as certain amount has been deposited.
Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is innocent. He is not named in the F.I.R. Applicant has been implicated on the basis of statement of co-accused. Applicant is in jail since 20.7.2019. As such, he has been under incarceration for more than two years and two months. The offence complained of is triable by Magistrate.
Learned counsel for applicant has next invited attention of Court to the statement of first informant wherein she has stated that sum of Rs. 51,000/- is involved in the illegal transaction in the bank account of the informant and subsequently withdrawn by keeping the informant in dark. It is lastly contended that looking into the period of incarceration and the fact that case is triable by Magistrate and maximum sentence is seven years, interest of justice require that applicant be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. However, he could not dispute the factual and legal submissions of learned counsel for applicant.
Having heard learned counsel for applicant learned A.G.A. for State upon perusal of material brought on record, accusation made as well as the complicity of applicant but without making any comment on the merits of the case, I find that applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly, bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Neeraj Mishra, 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.
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 :- 7.4.2021 Arshad