Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36296 of 2021 Applicant :- Pankaj Bhati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anjali Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.387 of 2020, under Section 386 IPC, P .S. Beeta-2, District Gautam Buddh Nagar.
As per the allegation, the first informant and the accused persons including the applicant were having business relationship and by taking him into confidence on 30.4.2019, the applicant along with other co accused are said to have taken three different cheques of different dates and further on subsequent dates four more cheques were taken by these accused persons.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the alleged cheques have not been issued in favour of the applicant nor the same has been deposited in his bank account. The amount has been deposited in the bank account of co accused Devesh and his case is distinguishable from that of co accused Devesh. It is further contended that there is delay of 15 months in lodging the FIR and there is no explanation of such delay. Applicant is a student and is in jail since 4.08.2020.
It is further contended that the applicant is prosecuted of his being real brother of co accused Devesh. It has further been brought on record that the applicant does not have any bank account in his name as such the allegation levelled against the applicant is not made out against him. It is further submitted that it is purely a civil dispute and has wrongly been given a dispute of criminal nature.
The applicant has also explained criminal history of two cases under paragraph no. 18 of the bail application, according to which he is on bail in one case being Case Crime No. 181 of 2020 under Section 302, 201, 394, 411, 34 IPC and the other case is under the Gangster Act.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposes the application for bail. He submits that the investigation is now complete and the charge sheet has been filed.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant- Pankaj Bhati, who is involved in aforementioned case 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.
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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, 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 him 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.
In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 22.12.2021/RavindraKSingh