Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41419 of 2018 Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Saxena Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sarveshwar Singh @ S.S.Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Sarveshwar Singh @ S.S.Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jai Narain, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is the Clerk but for the time being he was given the charge of Sub-Registrar and he has been falsely implicated in the present case with malafide intention. He further submits that the prosecution case as narrated in the FIR is concocted one as no such occurrence has taken place nor any recovery of two notes of Rs.100/- each has been made from possession of the applicant. He next argued that the implication of the applicant in the present case is wholly illegal and arbitrary outcome of malafide intention of Tehsildar Durgesh Yadav. The allegations levelled against the applicant is absolutely false, frivolous and baseless. No offence is made out against the applicant. The applicant is no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 24.9.2018.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant-Pramod Kumar Saxena involved in Case Crime No.1149 of 2018, under Section 7/13(1) (d) & 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District-Etah be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.one lac with two sureties (one should be of his family members) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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.
The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 30.10.2018 NS