Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
As per the prosecution case, the complainant took 2-BHK flat in the Basera Enclave in Ansal API township in the name of younger brother Manoj Kumar Kushwaha. The applicant was supposed to hand over the flat to the complainant in three years but after lapse of six years, the flat was not given to the complainant. It is further alleged that the developers are not giving him the flat neither his money is being refunded. Therefore, the present F.I.R. under Section 409/420/504/506 I.P.C. was lodged on 04.10.2019 which was registered as F.I.R./Crime No.461/2018 at P.S. Hazratganj, District Lucknow. Learned counsel for applicant submits that immediately after lodging of the F.I.R. compromise was arrived between company and Mr. Manoj Kumar Kushwaha brother of the complainant, Deepak Kumar Kushwaha. The compromise is not disputed by the State. Learned counsel for applicant further submits that applicant is in jail since 04.10.2019.
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.
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 and the complainant both have settled the dispute and have entered into compromise, the State has not disputed the compromise, in the similar cases, the applicant has been enlarged on bail, matter is triable by Magistrate, Chargesheet in the matter has already been filed, for the period for which he is in jail 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./Crime No. 461/2018, under Sections 409/420/504/506 IPC, Police Station -Hazratganj, 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