Allahabad High Court
Jagmohan Singh vs State Of U.P. on 6 January, 2020
Author: Karunesh Singh Pawar
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 27 Case :- BAIL No. - 12554 of 2019 Applicant :- Jagmohan Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar,Sanjay Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
As per the prosecution story, co-accused Akhilesh Kumar Shukla took loan of Rs.3,30,000/- for purchase of a car and another co-accused was guarantor in the said loan. The borrower could not pay the installment of loan due to which the bank issued notices to borrower as well as guarantor. It is further alleged that the accused Girish Chandra handed over Rs.2,15,000/- to the applicant on 17.04.2015 in respect of which the applicant issued their receipt in his own signature however did not deposited the said amount in the loan account of the borrower, namely, Akhilesh Kumar Shukla. It is also alleged that the applicant has released a registered sale deed under mortgage to the guarantor and got signed the mortgage confirmation deed and has not informed the bank neither obtained permission from one time settlement from the bank.
Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is a retired Branch Manager of 62 years of age and he has no criminal history. He further submits that applicant has already deposited Rs.2,49,000/- in the bank. Applicant is innocent and has not committed any offence. It is further alleged that applicant has taken legal opinion and followed the guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India for sanctioning of the car loan. He further submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. Learned counsel for applicant further submits that applicant is in jail since 18.10.2019. Matter is triable by Magistrate. Chargesheet in the matter has already been filed.
It is lastly submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the period for which he is in jail and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.
Let the applicant, Jagmohan Singh involved in Case Crime No. 45 of 2019, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 409 IPC, Police Station - Aminabad, District - Lucknow 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iv) 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.
(v) 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.
(vi) 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.
Order Date :- 6.1.2020 Shubhankar