Allahabad High Court
Syed Mohammad Imran Alam vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. on 29 April, 2022
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 28 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4223 of 2022 Applicant :- Syed Mohammad Imran Alam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Saima Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard Ms. Saima Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.132 of 2017, under Sections 406, 420, 506 IPC & Section 8 of P.C. Act, Police Station Aashiyana, District Lucknow, during the pendency of trial.
As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have duped the first informant to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- on the pretext that his son shall be provided a job as Bandi Rakshak in District Jail, Bahraich.
Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. The applicant was the tenant in the house of the first informant and he had already filed a complaint with the Press Council of India alleging that some documents, computer and printer have been taken away by the first informant on 16.10.2016. Learned counsel has further argued that the matter is of civil nature pertaining to the eviction of the said premises and the present FIR has been lodged just to add colour to the said story. It is also a counterblast to the said application filed by the complainant on 26.11.2016 against the first informant. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 30.03.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra, Sri Vijay Srivastava, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that there is a document signed by the applicant stating to get the son of the first informant appointed as Bandi Rakshak. However, he could not dispute the fact that there is no criminal history of the applicant and there are litigations pending between the parties.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Syed Mohammad Imran Alam, who is involved in aforementioned case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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 IPC.
(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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 29.4.2022 Ravi Kant