High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 49 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18557 of 2023
Legal Reasoning
7. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the present application for bail. He submits that applicant is a Government Servant and he was caught red handed by the Trap Team with cash of Rs. 20,000/-. The possession of the said amount could not be explained by applicant sufficiently before the trap team. Offence complained of is an economic offence. On the above premise, the learned A.G.A. submits that no indulgence be granted by this Court in favour of applicant. 8. Having heard, the learned senior counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of material brought on record as well as the complicity of applicant and accusation made coupled with the fact that the applicant is simply a Class- III employee working as a Government Servant on the post of Village Development Officer, the clean antecedents of the applicant inasmuch as he has no criminal history to his credit except present one, the charge sheet have been submitted against applicant, therefore, the evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant now stands crystallized, there being no such peculiar circumstance warranting custodial arrest of applicant during the course of trial, the applicant having undergone more than 5 months of incarceration, but without making any comments on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant-Amresh Kumar Singh, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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 SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE 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/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC. (iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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/HER, 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. (v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT. 11. However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this Court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above. Order Date :- 26.4.2023 Vinay Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Arguments
Applicant :- Amresh Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prakhar Saran Srivastava,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. Kamal Krishna, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Prakhar Saran Srivastava, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. 2. Perused the record. 3. This application for bail has been filed by applicant-Amresh Kumar Singh in connection with Case Crime No. 529 of 2022, under Section 7 Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station- Kotwali, District-Mau during the pendeny of trial. 4. Record shows that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have occurred on 30.11.2022, a prompt FIR dated 30.11.2022 was lodged by first informant-Santosh Kumar Dixit, Head Inspector, Trap Team, ACO and was registered as Case Crime No. 529 of 2022, under Section 7 Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Mau. In the aforesaid FIR, applicant has been nominated as solitary named accused. 5. The gravamen of the allegations made in the FIR is to the effect that applicant was trapped by the police team along with cash of Rs. 20,000/-. 6. Learned Senior Counsel for applicant submits that occurrence giving rise to present criminal proceedings occurred on 30.11.2022. Applicant was taken into custody on 30.11.2022 itself. As such, on date, applicant has undergone approximately 5 months of incarceration. The charge sheet has also been submitted against applicant on 26.01.2023. As such, the evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution now stands crystallized. There is no such exceptional circumstance warranting custodial arrest of applicant during the course of trial. Even otherwise, applicant is a man of clean antecedents inasmuch as, he has no criminal history to his credit except present one. The amount which was trapped from the applicant is only Rs. 20,000/-. The applicant was working as a Class-III employee on the post of Village Development Officer (Gram Panchayat Adhikari). However, up to this stage, the acid test required to be satisfied for invoking the provisions of Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act as explained in paragraph 68 of the Constitution Bench judgment as Neeraj Dutta Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2022 OnLine SC 1724 is not completely satisfied against applicant. On the cumulative strength of above, the learned Senior Counsel submits that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case, he is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial.