Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16110 of 2021 Applicant :- Ravindra Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sikandar B. Kochar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Mr. Gopal Swaroop Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Sikandar B. Kochar, learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record of the case.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Ravindra Kumar Singh with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.
59 of 2021, under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, police station Kotwali, district Azamgarh during the pendency of trial.
In short compass the facts of this case as unfolded by the prosecution are that the first information report of this case has been lodged by Sri Ram Dhari Mishra, Incharge-Inspector (Prevention of Corruption Organization Unit) Gorakhpur on 22.2.2021 at police station Kotwali, Azamgarh alleging inter alia therein that complainant Dr. Manoj Kumar Srivastava met him along with an application dated 19.2.2021 to the effect that he is the owner of Kishori Devi Memorial Hospital having old registration No. 362 situated near the Tarwa Bazar, police station Tarwa, Tehsil Lalganj, district Azamgarh. However, according to the new policy of the State Government, he has applied for registration of online Medical Establishment Certificate of the said hospital in the month of January, 2021 to the office of Chief Medical Officer, Azamgarh, for which message of online registration was received by him on his mobile number. After receiving the message, the complainant approached the applicant in the office of Chief Medical Officer, Gorakhpur, where applicant, Ravindra Kumar Singh was posted as Samprati Sahayak Shodh Adhikari. However, for issuance of Medical Establishment Certificate, the applicant had demanded illegal gratification of Rs. 5000/-. In this regard, the complainant-Dr. Manoj Kumar Srivastava made a complaint to the first informant Incharge Inspector (Prevention of Corruption Organization Unit) Gorakhpur, who recorded the statement of complainant, Manoj Kumar Srivastava on 20.2.2021. Thereafter, after obtaining the permission of the concerned superior officer, a team was constituted, which arrested the applicant after completing necessary formalities as provided under the Prevention of Corruption Act and recovery of Rs. 5000/- was effected, which was given by the trap team to the complainant, which in turn was paid to the applicant.
The first and foremost argument of Mr. G.S. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant is that the applicant is absolutely innocent has falsely been implicated in the present case in collusion with his colleagues, who were working with him as they were inimical to the applicant after his promotion to the post of a Gazetted Officer and his recent posting at the office of Chief Medical Officer, Azamgarh. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the complaint has admittedly been given by the complainant on 19.2.2021 and three days thereafter i.e. 22.2.2021 the first information report has been lodged after the arrest and recovery of Rs. 5,000/-. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of the Court towards the arrest memo of the applicant, which has been prepared on 22.2.2021 in which the time of arrest of the applicant has been shown as 12.15 hours and case crime number has also been mentioned as 59 of 2021, whereas from bare perusal of the first information report dated 22.2.2021 indicates that the same has been lodged at 19.30 hours, hence mentioning of the case crime No. 59 of 2021 in the arrest memo prior to lodging the first information report creates a serious doubt about the veracity of the entire prosecution version. Learned counsel for the applicant has hammered the prosecution version on the ground that Dr. Manoj Kumar Srivastava, who made the complaint neither run the said hospital nor he is the owner, but the same was run by Dr. Rajni Srivastava. Further, so far as complainant, Dr. Manoj Kumar Srivastava is concerned, he is simply a Bachelor of Homeopathic Medicine and Surgery. Learned counsel for the applicant urged that the offence in question is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to seven years. The applicant is Government servant, hence there is no chance of fleeing away from the judicial process. He is not a previous convict. The applicant is facing detention for the last more than five months since 22.2.2021 and in case he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the applicant was caught red handed by the trap party after he had demanded the illegal gratification of Rs. 5000/- from the complainant. He further submits that there were recovery and independent witness of the offence.
Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of the offence and the punishment provided and the period of detention of the applicant, I am of the view that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Ravindra Kumar Singh 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 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.
(v) The applicant shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(vi) The computer generated copy of this order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(vii) 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.
It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
Order Date :- 29.7.2021 Sumaira