Court No. - 89
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14714 of 2021 Applicant :- Virendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Chandra Shukla,Amit Daga Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. Amit Daga, learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.
2. Perused the record.
3. This bail application has been filed by applicant-Virendra Kumar seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.257of 2020 under Sections 379, 411, 419, 420, 467, 468 I.P.C. and Sections 3, 57, 70 Indian Mines and Minerals (Concession) Act, Police Station-Tehrauli, District-Jhansi during pendency of trial.
4. Perusal of record shows that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have occurred on 24.12.2020, a delayed F.I.R. dated 30.12.2020 was lodged by first informant Sri Tarun Aneja, and was registered as Case Crime No.257of 2020 under Sections 379, 411, 419, 420, 467, 468 I.P.C. and Sections 3, 57, 70 Indian Mines and Minerals (Concession) Act,. In the aforesaid F.I.R., owner and driver of disputed truck bearing no. UP, T8972 have been nominated as named accused.
5. According to the prosecution story as unfolded in the F.I.R. it is alleged that minor mineral has been illegally excavated and and same has been transported on the basis of forged MM11.
6. Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in above mentioned case crime number. Applicant is in jail since 07.01.2021. As such, applicant has been undergone incarceration for more than three months. Allegations made in F.I.R. are false and concocted. It is next contended that driver of the truck has already been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 13.03.2021. Copy of same has been placed before Court by learned counsel for applicant. Same is taken on record and reproduced herein-under:
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.257 of 2020, under Sections 379, 411, 419, 420, 467, 468 IPC and 3, 57, 70 of Indian Mines and Minerals(Concession) Act, Police Station- Tehrauli, District-Jhansi is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Submission made by learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is a driver of the vehicle in question. It is alleged that the vehicle in question is being used for illegal mining of sand. It has been strenuously contended by learned counsel for the applicant that there are two contradictory report given by the S.D.M, Tehrauli on 24.12.2020 and 28.12.2020 regarding MM-11. Thereafter, the owner of the vehicle applied for the compounding of the offence and vide order dated 29/30.12.2020, compounding amount of Rs.33,100/- imposed by the Senior Mining Officer, Jhansi and the same was deposited by the applicant and the vehicle in question was released in favour of the applicant. On the same day, the present FIR was got registered by one Tarun Taneja under the aforesaid sections of IPC giving entire different look to the prosecution story. It has been contended that relying upon the contradictory report of the S.D.M. Tehrauli coupled with the fact that the applicant has already deposited the compounding fee and the vehicle in question has been released in favour of the owner, thus parallel criminal prosecution is nothing but arm twisting to the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant lastly submitted that the applicant, who is in jail since 07.01.2021, is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of trial.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A., I find it to be a fit case for bail.
In view of the above, let the applicant-Jai Hind be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in case crime no.257 of 2020, under Sections 379, 411, 419, 420, 467, 468 IPC and 3, 57, 70 of Indian Mines and Minerals(Concession) Act, Police Station- Tehrauli, District-Jhansi with the following conditions :-
(a) The applicant shall attend the court according to the conditions of the bond executed by him;
(b) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail."
7. On the aforesaid premise, learned counsel for applicant contends that co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 12.03.2021. Offence alleged to have been committed by applicant under the Minor Mineral (Regulation and Development) Act have already been compounded. There is no possibility of the applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case, applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. On the aforesaid factual premise, it is thus urged that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
8. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.
9. Having heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of material brought on record, the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
10 Accordingly, bail application is allowed.
11. Let the applicant- Virendra Kumar 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.
12. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
13. 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 for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 7.4.2021/YK