Court No. - 23
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44734 of 2017 Applicant :- Raj Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Nitin Kumar Agrawal,Mohd. Aslam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Satya Prakash
Hon'ble Mrs. Rekha Dikshit,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Satya Prakash, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that it is alleged in the first information report that three accused persons namely Shubham Singh, Rajiv Mahajan and Arvind Saxena have cheated the complainant by giving assurance of admission of his son Abhishek in Medical College. The complainant gave cheque of Rs. 6,30,000/- in favour of the medical college and accused applicant issued forged receiving of that cheque from the institution and thereafter took money as bribery from the complainant in the garb of admission of his son in the medical college but the cheque could not be cleared off.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that accused applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case due to business rivalry between the complainant and accused applicant. They are inhabitant of adjacent locality of District Ghaziabad and are well known to each other being the same business of property dealing. It is further submitted that the witnesses of the complainant have not identified to the accused applicant, who is said to have committed the alleged offence. There is no documentary evidence against the accused applicant about taking the alleged amount from the complainant. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the accused applicant. Accused applicant has never introduced to the complainant from other coaccused and he has not received any amount from him. The accused applicant is languishing in jail since 7.9.2017. It is next submitted that the applicant is neither a previous convict nor he has any criminal history. It is further 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 counsel for the complainant, 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.
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 Raj Chaudhary involved in Case Crime No. 1775 of 2016, under Sections 420,467,468,469 and 471 IPC, Police Station Sahibabad, District Ghaziabad 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 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.
Order Date :- 25.4.2018 GSY