Allahabad High Court
Vijay Bahadur Verma vs State Of U.P. on 3 January, 2020
Author: Jaspreet Singh
Bench: Jaspreet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 6 Case :- BAIL No. - 2566 of 2019 Applicant :- Vijay Bahadur Verma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Yadav "Vijay" Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The applicantVijay Bahadur Vermahas moved this bail application seeking bail in respect of his involvement in Case Crime No. 429 of 2018, under Sections 489-A, 489-B, 489-C, 489-D, 489-E IPC, Police Station Peeparpur, District Amethi.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the allegations against the applicant have been incorporated only to falsely implicate the applicant. As per the prosecution case on 07.11.2018 upon an information received by the police party from an informant the applicant has been alleged to be involved in printing fake currency notes of the denomination of Rs. 2,000, 500 and 100. It has also been alleged that a total currency of 97,700/- was recovered from the room of the applicant along with a printer and scissors.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is a person of a rural background and is only educated up to class V. He has further submitted that he belongs to a financially low strata of the society. The applicant has been falsely implicated, inasmuch as, the counter affidavit filed by the State, it would indicate that the alleged recovery was made on 07.11.2018 whereas the aforesaid articles/currency which were recovered were sent for examination only on 11.01.2019.
The learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that as per the report sent by the currency press note at Nasik Road, it indicates that the currency which was allegedly recovered from the applicant does not fit the description of a counterfeit as defined under Section 28 of the I.P.C. Coupled with the fact that the report indicates that the alleged currency did not contain the necessary particulars regarding the length, width, thickness texture not it even had the currency numbers and that in any case the alleged recovered notes could not resemble the original in any real sense and as such the applicant who has been in Jail since 07.11.2018 and is entitled to be enlarged on bail, inasmuch as, the aforesaid allegations are yet to be tested in trial, coupled with the fact that there can be no chance for the applicant to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence as the same was on account of the fact that it was the police party which had made the recovery.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted that the offence for which the applicant has been charged is serious in nature, however, he could not dispute the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 07.11.2018 as well as that the matter including the allegations against the applicant are yet to be tested in trial.
Considering the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, material available on record as well as the totality of the facts and circumstances, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let the applicantVijay Bahadur Vermainvolved in Case Crime No. 429 of 2018, under Sections 489-A, 489-B, 489-C, 489-D, 489-E IPC, Police Station Peeparpur, District Amethibe released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court and will not leave the district without informing the Court concerned subject to following conditions:
(i) The applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.
(ii) The applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charges; and (c) recorded 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.
Order Date :- 3.1.2020 Asheesh