Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21145 of 2018 Applicant :- Shahid Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Tiwari,Lok Nath Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Shahid with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 394 of 2017, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Uttar, District- Firozabad, during pendency of trial.
As per order dated 03.7.2018 passed by this Court, learned counsel for the applicant has filed a supplementary affidavit annexing therewith the applications sent to the bank under the Right to Information Act, requesting the bank to inform the details of the outstanding dues and the date of the One Time Settlement proposal entered with the bank by the applicant. It is stated in the supplementary affidavit that the bank has not replied to the same.
From the first information report, it appears that the loan was got sanctioned after misrepresentation of the identity of the guarantor. The guarantor was Shabir, who has already died on 09.12.2009 and it has been stated that one Haroon Beg represented himself as Shabir and loan was sanctioned on such misrepresentation by the bank.
The learned counsel for the applicant has argued that Haroon Beg has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 03.7.2018 passed by the Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 13283 of 2018. The recovery suits against the applicant and also One Time Settlement are pending. The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.12.2017. He does not have any criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released 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 innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Having considered the submissions of the parties and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant Shahid involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 26.7.2018 Ruchi Agrahari