Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26773 of 2019 Applicant :- Rakesh Babu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Rai,Shri Rakesh Pande,Senior Adv.
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Rakesh Babu in connection with Case Crime No.12 of 2014, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Section 3/7 of Essential Commodity Act, P.S. Vijaygarh, District Aligarh.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that the applicant is a Government Servant and he was posted as Assistant Development Officer (Panchayat), Akarabad when the alleged bungling in the distribution of food-grains to the card holders are alleged to have been committed. The report was lodged on the complaint of the public person on 27.01.2014 and the matter was investigated and the Investigating Officer had submitted the final report in the matter. Senior Prosecuting Officer also gave their opinion that there is no evidence against the applicant, copy whereof has been annexed on annexure nos.8 and 9 of the bail application. He further submitted that the matter was further investigated on the directions of the District Magistrate concerned and the Investigating Officer got recorded the statements of complainant under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and on the basis of the statement, the applicant was implicated and arrested. He further submitted that in Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. 1951 of 2019 in the case of Dharvendra Singh, who is alleged to be fair price shop holder, this Court vide order dated 18.01.2019 has directed that no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicant, copy whereof has been annexed on page no.106 of the bail application. He further submitted that the allegation against the applicant is that he gave certificate that the fair price shop holder has distributed the food-gains and other articles for the months of August to November, 2012. He further submitted that Assistant Development Officer has given the certificate after verifying the documents and registers which were produced before him by the fair price shop holder. He further submitted that it was not the duty and was not the domain of the Assistant Development Officer to personally supervise each fair price shop and verify that card holders are properly getting the food-grains or not. He further submitted that the applicant has given the certificate that the distribution of food-grains and other articles through the fair price shop was done as per law on the basis of the records, which were produced before him. He submitted that all the offences are triable by the court of Magistrate. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.06.2019 and in case, he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail plea but has not disputed the fact that it was not humanly possible for Assistant Development Officer to look into and personally supervise the distribution of food-grains of each fair price shop in the block.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Rakesh Babu involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission;
v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
Order Date :- 26.7.2019 R./