Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
It has been submitted that this is third bail application. First bail application was rejected on 03.07.2017 and second bail application was dismissed as not pressed on 25.07.2019.
On the request of applicant, notice was issued to the complainant. As according to police report, P.S. Hazratganj, Lucknow, the said notice is served on complainant through his family member. However, records indicates that in previous bail application a victim had filed her counter affidavit.
None is present on behalf of informant.
This bail application has been filed by the accused-applicant Vijay Prakash Sinha, who is involved in Case Crime No. 252 of 2017 under Sections 342, 323, 504, 295-A, 506, 354-A, 354-A(2), 420, 406, 376, 511, 120-B I.P.C., and Section 9(L), 9(P), 10 & 16 POSCO Act, Police Station, Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and due to management dispute in institution, he has falsely been implicated in the case. The applicant was Honorary Secretary of U.P. Badminton Association and his son co-accused Nishant Sinha was elected as Executive Secretary of the said Association. The affairs of the association was being managed by co-accused Nishant Sinha. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that co-accused has harassed, assaulted and applied criminal force with intend outrage the modesty of girl players. He demanded money from players in illegal manner and discriminated players of other religion. The only allegation on applicant is that he could not interfere in the activities of co-accused Nishant Sinha, rather, he omitted to perform his duty and kept mum on the complaints regarding misbehaviour and acts of molestation of his son, who was Executive Secretary of the Association.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that there are statements of witnesses recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. who were the players and trainees of the Association. All the witnesses have named co-accused Nishant Sinha for ill behaviour and the role of applicant has been shown only to support the co-accused Nishant Sinha by not taking any action against co-accused. It has further been argued that provisions of POCSO Act is not applicable in the case as the victims were major at the time of alleged offence. It has been alleged that applicant has committed offence defined and punishable under Section 420 and 406 I.P.C. as well as he has abated the offence of co-accused. Next submission is that co-accused Nishant Sinha has been released on interim bail by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 10.5.2019. Subsequently, the aforesaid interim bail order was confirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court on 15.07.2020. The applicant has been removed from the affairs of institution on the ground of illness as, he is suffering from different serious ailments. Co-accused has also been removed from the institution and at present, neither he nor co-accused Nishant Sinha has any concerned with the affair of institution. He is languishing in jail for more than 3 years and 1/2 yrs. In fact, the applicant in jail since 24.03.2017. The chargesheet has been submitted and trial is continuing. Two witnesses have also been examined in trial. Lastly, he submits that if, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant was in governing position in the Association. Despite complaints, he did not make any effort to control the activities of Co-accused Nishant Sinha. He neither made any effort to control the activities of co-accusd, who was his son nor he took any action against him, rather, he has supported him and was involved in demand of money illegally from players. The institution has a reputation and is one of the prime institution of national level. The bright future of the players become ruined. A serious allegation has been imposed on the co-accused as well as on applicant in the F.I.R. which is supported by the statement of informant and victim. He further submitted that the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant has previously been considered in his first bail application. The present bail application is liable to be rejected.
In the light of above arguments, it appears that co-accused Nishant Sinha was having serious allegation in the F.I.R. has been released on bail by the Hon'ble Apex Court. Applicant is languishing in jail since considerable period. He has already been removed from the institution.
Hence, considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, facts and circumstances of the case, accusation and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering the witnesses, pairity and prima facie satisfaction of the court in support of the charges, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let the accused/applicant Vijay Prakash Sinha, involved in Case Crime No. 252 of 2017 under Sections 342, 323, 504, 295-A, 506, 354-A, 354-A(2), 420, 406, 376, 511, 120-B I.P.C., and Section 9(L), 9(P), 10 & 16 POSCO Act, Police Station, Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow, be released on bail subject to the following conditions.
(i). The applicant will furnish a personal bond with two sureties each of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
(ii). The applicant will appear and strictly comply following terms of bond executed under section 437 sub section 3 of Chapter- 33 of Cr.P.C.-
(a) applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed under this Chapter.
(b) he will not indulge in any criminal activities.
(c) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii). The applicant shall cooperate with investigation /trial.
(iv). 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.
(v). The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(vi). In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial 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.
(vii) The applicant if having any passport, he will submit the same in court concerned within seven days from the date of his release from jail and in any condition he will not leave the country without permission of the court concerned.
(viii). The applicant shall remain present, 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.
Order Date :- 13.1.2021 Reena/-