Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23516 of 2021 Applicant :- Vijendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dur Vijay Singh,Viquar Mehdi Zaidi (Senior Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pankaj Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, learned Counsel for the complainant and perused the material available on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 529 of 2020, under Section 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S. Quarsi, District Aligarh.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is farmer and informant is property dealer. On 20.02.2021, an agreement to sell was executed for an amount of Rs.4,10,00,000/- on a condition that sale deed should be executed within a period of six months. First informant was not ready to pay the amount and executed the sale deed. The agreement to sell was modified on 16.07.2014 that half part of informant's property will be purchased, even then money was not paid and he kept mum. Neither he gave any notice nor filed any suit for specific performance. Thereafter by means of forged agreement to sell dated 19.02.2014 this FIR has been lodged on an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. The suit became barred that is why to pressurise the applicant this FIR has been lodged giving colour of criminal case. The case is purely of civil nature since cost of land hiked that is why this FIR has been lodged. There is no intention on the part of the applicant to commit fraud. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.12.2020.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that informant is also farmer not property dealer. He further submit that agreement to sell was executed by applicant's parents and the informant that is why forged document was created by the applicant himself raising the amount to Rs. 21,73,60,000/-. He further submits that a DVD has been also collected by the investing officer during investigation with regard to conversation between Bhupendra Singh and informant about the forgery of sale deed dated 19.02.2014 which has not been disclosed by the applicant. Further Lakhan Singh, brother of the applicant, independent witness, supported the prosecution version in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. He also submits that there is also evidence regarding committing forgery of the paper as it is alleged that on 19.02.20214 agreement was executed but notary by whom agreement alleged to have been executed has been found not in existence.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, registered agreement/registered modified agreement to sell executed on 16.07.2014 and application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.moved on 15.02.2020 and perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant Virendra Singh involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground of cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 16.8.2021 MAA/-
Digitally signed by Justice Ali Zamin Date: 2021.08.19 13:49:46 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad