Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42602 of 2021 Applicant :- Ram Shanker Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Shukla,Bipin Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sujeet Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard Sri B.K. Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State, Sri Sujeet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.03 of 2021 under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, P.S. Prayagraj Sector (Satakata Adhishthan), District Prayagraj is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial. The applicant is languishing in jail since 3.9.2021.
Contention raised by the learned counsel for the applicant is that one Prabhakar Pratap Singh who is an Assistant Teacher is the complainant of the present case and on whose complaint a trap was organized and the applicant was nabbed while taking bribe of rupees ten thousand. Contention is that the entire case is a flimsy and trap itself is a doubtful proposition. Contention is that the complainant was put under suspension and after enquiry the applicant was reinstated in service after having adverse remark. During entire suspension period the balance amount to the tune of Rs.2,77,000/- was already paid by the applicant way back in February, 2021. The only allegation is against the applicant that he was not forwarding the documents of the complainant and demanding rupees ten thousand as illegal gratification. A trap was allegedly conducted at the rental accommodation of the applicant but after lifting the applicant the FIR and other formalities were conducted at Police Station Kotwali Sadar, District Pratapgarh. This by itself has vitiated the entire process of the prosecution. The applicant is aged about 55 years and is already languishing in jail for three and an half months.
Learned AGA as well as Sri Sujeet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that the FIR and other formalities were completed at P.S. Kotwali Sadar District Pratapgarh which vitiates the entire trap.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant, Ram Shanker, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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/APPLICANTS SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE/THEY SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE FIXED FOR EVIDENCE WHEN THE WITNESSES IS/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/APPLICANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER/THEIR COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIS/HER/THEIR UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT/APPLICANTS FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIS/HER/THEIR, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. IF IN THE OPINION OF THE TRIAL COURT ABSENCE OF THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS IS/ARE 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 HIS/HER/THEIR IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant/applicants to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:
1. The applicant/applicants shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is/are restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.
2. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
3. The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
4. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 20.12.2021 SP