Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37623 of 2019 Applicant :- Ritesh Soni Opposite Party :- Union of India Counsel for Applicant :- Suraj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Krishna Agarawal
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri S.K.Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Krishna Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and also perused the record.counse Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to make necessary correction tin the memo of bail application during the course of the day.
This is the second bail application. The first bail application was rejected by this Court on 4.9.2018 on merits with a direction to the trial court to expedite and conclude the trial of the applicant within 6 months from the date of production of certified copy of the order.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive and he has committed no offence. It is next contended that only the role of carrying the gold is allegedly assigned to the applicant.It is next contended that nothing has been recovered from his possession.Learned counsel for the applicant has mainly focused on the point of sentence and vehemently argued that maximum sentence provided under the offending section is maximum 7 years and not less than 1 year and more than 1 and half years of the sentence has already gone by the applicant.Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 23.2.2018. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent.
Learned counsel for the contesting opposite party has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that foreign origin gold bars and bangles worth more than 3 crores have been recovered from the applicant, but he could not dispute over the sentence provided under the offending Act.
Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment, and also considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as peiiod of detention, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Ritesh Soni involved in Complaint Case No.1409 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No. Nil of 2018. under Section 135 Customs Act, Police Station Custom(P) Division, District Varanasi be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.5.00 lacs each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:-
(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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
The trial court is further directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of the order, if there is no legal impediment, Order Date :- 28.11.2019 IA