Court No. - 62
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40038 of 2018 Applicant :- Sukumar Sarkhel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Srivastava,Ram Chandra Sahu,Ram Chandra Uttam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged.
Heard Sri A.K.Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and also perused the record..
According to the prosecution case the applicant and co accused Anoop Kumar Chkravorty committed forgery with the complaianant white regard to allotment of some protect for which transactions of money had taken place by crediting Rs. 7.50 lacs in the account of applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is not the beneficiary and the amount was credited by the co-accused and not by the complainant for treatment of his mother. The applicant is languishing in jail since 14.8.2018 having no criminal history; recovery was not connected with any crime; recovery was falsely shown by the Police against the applicant; there is no independent witness; the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.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.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.
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, 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 Sukumar Sarkhel involved in Case Crime No. 431 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420 I.P.C. & Sections 66 & 67 I.T.Act, Police Station Civil Lines, District Allahabad be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties (Rs. 2.00 lacs each) (One should be of a family member) 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.
Order Date :- 21.12.2018 IA