Court No. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29258 of 2021 Applicant :- Vipendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Abhijeet Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vikrant Rana
Hon'ble Anil Kumar Ojha,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 0222 of 2021, under Section 420, 409, 411 & 120B of I.P.C., Police Station- Noida Sector 39, District Commissionerate (Gautam Budh Nagar).
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Recovery of eight ATM cards and Rs. 6,50,000/- in cash from the possession of applicant is false. Allegation is that the applicant was detected in CCTV while committing the crime is wrong. There is no credible evidence against the applicant that the applicant along with co-accused has misappropriated Rs. 2,95,000/-. He has been implicated by submiting fictitious evidence in collusion with police. Fourteen days delay in lodging the F.I.R. has not been explained. Prima-facie there is no evidence against the applicant. Applicant is lying in jail since 04.05.2021. He has no criminal history. If he is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and contended that the applicant along with co-accused persons committed fraud of Rs. 1,21,43,000/-. Delay in lodging the F.I.R. has been explained. Rs. 6,40,000/- have been recovered from the possession of the applicant and huge amount of money is still lying with the relatives of the applicant and the same is still to be recovered, therefore, bail application of the accused applicant should be rejected.
Nature of accusation, evidence collected by I.O. in support of the charge, gravity of offence, nature and severity of punishment in case of conviction, complicity of the accused and all other attending circumstances were duly considered.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that Rs.1,21,43,000/- involved in the present case. Rs. 6,40,000/- have been recovered from the possession of the applicant and huge amount is still to be recovered, therefore, a case for bail is not made out.
Accordingly, bail application of the applicant, is rejected.
However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the aforesaid case and conclude the same strictly in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 309 Cr.P.C. within a period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
Furthermore, it is clarified that the observations, if any, made herein above shall be strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
Order Date :- 21.12.2021 VPS