Counter affidavit filed by Sri Hemant Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for complainant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This Court on 05.12.2019 passed the following order:
"Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been taken on remand in 21 cases of the similar nature, out of 21, in 19 cases the matter has been settled with the complainant. In this case the applicant has also entered into compromise with the complainant. The compromise is on record as Annexure No. 4. The co-accused in this case have been enlarged on bail. The copy of the order granting bail to the co-accused Arun Kumar Mishra and Harish Gulla are on record as Annexure No. 6 and 7 to the bail application.
Learned A.G.A. disputes this contention and prays for and is granted a week's time to file counter affidavit.
List on 17.12.2019 peremptorily after connecting with Bail No. 11760/2019."
Learned counsel for applicant submits that the State while filing the counter affidavit has not denied the factum of settlement with the complainant.
It is lastly submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Sri V.K. Sahi, learned Additional Advocate General submits that as long as builders are working bonafidely and the grievances of the informant are settled then State has no objection in granting bail to such builders.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, applicant has entered into compromise with the complainant, counsel for complainant as well as learned A.G.A. have not denied the compromise, the co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail, the matter is triable by Magistrate, and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.
Let the applicant, Pranav Ansal involved in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 333/2019, under Sections 406/420/467/468/471/504/506 IPC, Police Station - Vibhuti Khand, District - Lucknow 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iv) 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.
(v) 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.
(vi) 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.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 Shubhankar