Allahabad High Court
Mahendra Kumar Vajpayee vs Union Of India And Another on 12 September, 2019
Author: Vivek Kumar Singh
Bench: Vivek Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26379 of 2019 Applicant :- Mahendra Kumar Vajpayee Opposite Party :- Union Of India And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- B.K.Singh Raghuvanshi,G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Rajesh kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel appearing for Union of India and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and also perused the record.
This is the second bail application. The first bail application was rejected by this Court on 23.8.2018 on merits directing the trial court to expedite and conclude the trial of the applicant within 6 months from the date of production of certified copy of the order.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive and he has committed no offence. Only the role of carrying the gold is allegedly assigned to the applicant.It is next contended that nothing has been recovered from his possession and maximum sentence provided under the offending section is only 3 years and half of the sentence has already gone by the applicant.It is also contended that co-accused Girsih Agrawal has already been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.4.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.11892 of 2019. Learned counsel for the applicant next contended that the applicant is also entitled to get the benefit of Section 436 A, Cr.P.C. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 30.1.2018. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent.
Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon a judgement reported in the case of Hussain & another (AASU) Vs.Union of India:State of Rajasthan, 2017(Law Suit) Sc 201 wherein it was held that time line for disposal of bail applications ought to be fixed by the High Curt. It i was further held that as far as possible, bail application in subordinate courts should ordinarily be decided within one week and in High Courts within three weeks.
Learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment, and also considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Mahendra Kumar Vajpayee involved in Criminal Complaint Case No.941 of 2018, under Section 135 of Custom Act,Police Station Custom Department, District Varanasi be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount .to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) 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. 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 12.9.2019 IA