Allahabad High Court
Jagat Narain Shukla vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of ... on 18 October, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:70287 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1417 of 2023 Applicant :- Jagat Narain Shukla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sachindra Dwivedi,S M Singh Royekwar,Vaibhav Saxena Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Aditya Vikram Singh,Manish Kumar Tripathi Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Aditya Vikram Singh, learned counsel for complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 517 of 2021, under sections 406, 420, 467, 471, 504 and 506 of IPC, P.S.- P.G.I., District -Lucknow.
Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the applicant is no way involved in committing the offence as an agreement is said to be executed in between the other parties than the present applicant and the applicant has neither executed the agreement of sale nor he is the witness over there. He added that only on the basis of an oral statement of one of the witness, he has been falsely implicated while narrating the concocted story. Adding his argument he submits that the amount which has been in-credited in account of the present applicant is not with respect to the dispute for which the first information report has been lodged and that can be money dispute in between the parties. He also submits that the criminal intent is missing and there is no ample evidence against the applicant so as to connect him in the instant matter and the Investigating Officer without collecting any cogent piece of evidence has filed the charge-sheet.
He further argued that the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.06.2022 and the matter is triable by Magistrate and applicant is in jail since more than two years and even the charges have not been framed yet. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance on the judgment in the cases of Union of India Vs. K.A. Najeeb, 2021 3 SCC 712 decided on 1 February, 2021 and Manish Sisodia vs Directorate of Enforcement in SLP (Criminal) No. 8781 of 2024 decided on 9 August, 2024 and submits that the case of the present applicant is squarely covered with the ratio of judgment aforesaid thus, submission is that the applicant may be released on bail.
Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the complainant has vehemently opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that an amount of Rs. 26 Lacs has been credited in the account of the present applicant and some of the transactions is made thorough RTGS and some other mode. He added that the present applicant is beneficiary and he has committed cheat & fraud by misappropriating the amount which was in-credited in his account. He also added that the statement of one of the accused corroborates the story of the prosecution as he stated that the applicant has allured the purchaser with respect to purchase of the land in question though, the same was not in the name of applicant and it was well within the knowledge of the applicant thus, it is apparently a case where the applicant has committed cheat & fraud by misappropriating a huge amount and the applicant is not entitled for bail.
On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State has supported the version of counsel appearing for the complainant and submits that after thorough investigation it was found that the applicant was involved in committing cheat & fraud and the statement of one of the witness is also apparent that the applicant is involved in committing the offence and as such, he is not entitled for any relief.
Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the matter is triable by the Magistrate and the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.06.2022 and admittedly, the charges have not been framed yet. This Court has also noticed the fact that prima facie, there is no documentary proof/evidence against the applicant so as to commit the offence. This Court also finds that the applicant neither the executor of the agreement of sale nor he has signed as a witness over the same. The only evidence against the applicant is the oral statement of one of the witness. The applicant has also explained six cases criminal history and he has undertaken that he will not misuse liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.
Let the applicant- Jagat Narain Shukla involved in the aforementioned crime 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, with the following conditions:-
(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;
(2) 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. He 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;
(3) 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.; and (4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.
Order Date :- 18.10.2024 Satish