Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9581 of 2018 Applicant :- Sumit Awasthi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Mohan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Alok Ranjan Mishra
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri Viresh Mishra, learned Senior Counsel and Sri Anand Mohan Pandey counsel for the applicant and Sri G.S. Chaturvedi, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Alok Ranjan Mishra, counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The allegation against the applicant is that the applicant is the employee of a company "Biomass Research Evam Technical Solution Pvt. Ltd", Kanpur. The applicant is the employee of the company and he collects cheques and cash on behalf of the company aforesaid for the goods supplied by the company to its customers. The applicant collected cheques and cash payment on behalf of the company but after sometime the company was informed by the informant that the money has not been received from the informant. On inquiry it was discovered that the money has been deposited in the account of a firm opened by the applicant along with his mother. On further inquiry it was found that the applicant along with his brother-in-law, Anand Tripathi @ Milton, are manufacturing duplicate animal feed in the name of RRS and he has supplied the aforesaid spurious animal feed and misappropriated Rs. 3035 lakhs. When he went to the house of the applicant, his father, brother-in-law and others abused him and threatened him of life.
It has been argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. False allegation of supply of spurious animal feed have been wrongly made. He has not misused the money received on behalf of the employer company but he has supplied the goods of his own company and received the money.
Per contra, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the informant has submitted that it is clear case of cheating and fraud committed by the applicant, was clearly an employee of the company aforesaid and he has realised the money from the customers who received goods of the company and he has deposited the money in the account opened in the name of his own partnership firm. The name of the company of the employer and the partnership firm are almost identical and the applicant has opened the firm only to cheat his employer company and the entire assets of the applicant and his family are the result of the money realised by him from the customers of his employers. It has been further submitted that only the trial pending before the trial court be directed to be expedited and the applicant does not deserves to be enlarged on bail. The applicant has large number of cases registered against him and even if he is enlarged on bail no useful purposes would be served. He will not able to get bail in other cases in near future which are about 29 in numbers.
After hearing the rival submissions it is clear that the offence against the applicant appears to be made out from the allegations on record. However keeping in view the fact that the applicant is in jail since 11.06.2015 and in view of the mandate of the Section 436-A Cr.P.C. about half of the sentence which may be awarded to him has been carried out. Consideration of this application for bail is imperative. The anxiety of the counsel for the informant is that in case the applicant is released on bail he will not permit the trial to conclude and will delay the conclusion of trial. Large amount of money belonging to the employer company is involved in this case and therefore the cause of justice would suffer.
Learned A.G.A. has also opposed the prayer for bail on similar cases.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the 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 Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Sumit Awasthi, involved in Case Crime No. 796 of 2015 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 384, 504, 506 and 120-B I.P.C., Police Station- Kalyanpur, District- Kanpur Nagar 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected of the commission of which they are suspected.
5. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
6. The applicant shall not alienate any assets in the name of his two firms, in his personal land in the name of immediate family member without leave of the court.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court. The trial court is directed to make all endeavour to conclude the trial within a period of one year, without granting any undue adjournments to either of the parties.
Order Date :- 20.9.2018 Rohit