Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Satendra vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|26 April, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12791 of 2019 Applicant :- Satendra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard Shri Rakesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri A.R. Chaurasia, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is commission agent of the real estate and he is a private person. Co-accused Sanjeev Kumar, OSD Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority, Gautam Budh Nagar had also filed a criminal misc. bail application no.5072 of 2019 which was allowed by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.3.2019. In pursuance of the said order the other co-accused persons namely Gaurav Kumar, Manoj Kumar and Anil Kumar have also been granted bail in terms and conditions as has been laid down by this Court in the case of Sanjeev Kumar.It has further been submitted that the case of the applicant stands as par with co-accused Gaurav Kumar, Manoj Kumar, Anil Kumar who have been granted bail by a coordinate Bench in terms and conditions of the bail application of co-accused Sanjeev Kumar. He may also be enlarged on bail on the conditions imposed on co-accused Sanjeev Kumar.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that co-accused Sanjeev Kumar and other co-accused persons have also been granted bail by this coordinate Bench of this Court.
In view of the above factual position, this bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Satendra, involved Case Crime No. 421 of 2018, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, and Section 13 (1) (c) (d) and 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act Police Station Kasna, District- Gautam Budh Nagar, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties (out of which one should be of a family members) to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(I) Applicant will deposit an amount of Rs.3,75,000/- (25% of the amount alleged to have been illegally earned as per averment made in the counter affidavit) before the court below which shall be put in a Fixed Deposit Scheme of a Nationalized Bank bearing maximum rate of interest.
(ii) 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;
(iii) 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;
(iv) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fail 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;
(v) 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;
(vi) The applicant shall surrender his passport with the court below and not leave the country without court's permission;
(vii) Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified;
The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of co-accused P.C. Gupta and his relatives.
Order Date :- 26.4.2019 Gaurav
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Satendra vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
26 April, 2019
Judges
  • Ramesh Sinha
Advocates
  • Rakesh Kumar