Allahabad High Court
Madhur Shyam Shukla @ Deepu Shukla vs State Of U.P. on 24 March, 2021
Author: Ali Zamin
Bench: Ali Zamin
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37415 of 2020 Applicant :- Madhur Shyam Shukla @ Deepu Shukla Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramanand Pandey,Pardeep Narayan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shahroze Khan Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.148 of 2020, under Sections 406,419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Siddharth Nagar, District Siddharth Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that informant is a property dealer and Seraz Ahmad is mediator for sale of property of Soman. According to F.I.R. a deal was made for Rs.70,000,00/- and Rs.2,000,00/- was paid in advance to Seraz Ahmad and in the month of November Rs.13,50,000/- were taken by Seraz for purchase of stamp and remaining amount asked to transfer in the account. In the mean time stamp of Rs.4,000,00/- were purchased and in the month of December 2019, account of Soman of Axis Bank, adhar car, pan card was made available to the informant and asked to transfer the amount, believing Seraz informant transferred Rs.13,49,000/- in the A/c No.919010063149579 of Axis Bank on 09.01.2020 from his current A/c No.50200018759122 HDFC Bank and from A/c No.32048837582 SBI Navgarh Rs.4,82,000/- were transferred and Rs.6,000,00/- on 10.01.2020 in the account of Urban Bank were transferred through RTGS but sale deed was not executed. It is alleged that by opening a forged account in the name of Soman, the money was misappropriated. It is further alleged that in conspiracy of Tipu Shukla, Siddhant Sharma, Atikur Rehman, Akshay Kumar and Abdul Hamid a bank employee forged account in the name of Soman was opened on the basis of forged documents and money was misappropriated. Further submits that from the possession of the applicant no money has been recovered. As per charge sheet bank manager is not witness in the case except confessional statement and statement of inimical persons, there is no evidence against the applicant. As per para 16 of the bail application, applicant had enmity with Vikas Singh that is why he has stated against him. It is further submitted that Abdul Hamid and Siddhant Sharma have been enlarged on bail vide orders dated 21.01.2021 and 22.02.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.35754 of 2020 and 30275 of 2020. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 04.06.2020.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submit that as per F.I.R., Seraz in collusion with the applicant Siddhant Sharma, Atikur Rehman, Akshay Kumar and Abdul Hamid by preparing a forged document in the name of Soman with the intention to misappropriate the money opened a forged account in the name of Soman and misappropriated the money transferred in the account. As per statement of the informant, no any account was opened by him in Axis Bank, he had only account in State Bank and as per his statement applicant and other co-accused along with bank employee took him near the RTO office and took a photo in a mobile and also demanded adhar car by stating that agriculture loan will be transferred in the account and benefit of which will be given to him and when they will sale the land they will pay it and as per statement of Vikas Singh, applicant swiped the ATM card who is his neighbour and applicant used to withdraw money from the ATM of Axis Bank of petrol pump. Bail of Abdul Hamid was granted because Soman did not disclose his name, bail of Siddhant was granted because no money was withdrawn by him, Rs.2,000,00/- were withdrawn by the applicant, therefore, his case is distinguished, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, complicity of the applicant, nature of offence, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Madhur Shyam Shukla @ Deepu Shukla involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his/her 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.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
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 :- 24.3.2021 Jitendra