High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25745 of 2022
Legal Reasoning
Applicant :- Constable 2960 Amardeep Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Namit Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. Heard Sri Namit Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.B. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Constable 2960 Amardeep, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.126 of 2022, under Section 388 IPC and under Section 7/13 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station Fatehganj West District Bareilly. The prosecution case as per FIR lodged on 13.5.2022 by Sanjay Kumar Singh, Inspector In-Charge Police Station Fatehganj, Bareilly against the applicant is that on 12.05.2022 he heard an audio clip which was viral on the social media in which Constable 2960 Amardeep posted at the said police station was heard demanding Rs.10 lakhs for getting the name of accused Sonu deleted in a case. He was illegally pressurizing the party for giving the money. He states that he recognizes the voice of constable Amardeep. The said act is punishable under Section 388 IPC and Section 7/13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The FIR was thus lodged. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the applicant is a police constable posted at Police Chauki within the Police Station Fatehganj. It is argued that the investigation of matters is not within the domain of the applicant. The applicant cannot add or subtract any accused in any matter in which investigation is going on. The implication of the applicant is on the basis of suspicion only. It is argued that the said audio clip was made viral as stated, the same is just with an intention to falsely implicate the applicant as there is no description as to who was the person who called on the mobile. It is argued that till date no independent person has made any complaint whatsoever of the applicant demanding any money for any act in the said case. Even during investigation the statement of the applicant was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., copy of which is annexure no.3 to the affidavit in which the applicant has denied his involvement in the present matter. The applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 27 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 13.5.2022. Per contra learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that as per the allegations against the applicant, there was a demand of Rs.10 lakhs by the applicant for deleting/exonerating the accused Sonu in a matter. It is argued that even a certificate under Section 64-B of the Evidence Act has been given which is part of the record, details of which are at page 40 of the paper book. It is argued that as such there is positive implication of the applicant in the present case. The bail application be thus rejected. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the implication of the applicant is on the basis of some audio clip which was made viral. The applicant is a police constable and as per his post, cannot investigate any matter. The applicant is not having any criminal history. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. Let the applicant-Constable 2960 Amardeep, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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 prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., 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, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C. (v) 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 him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229- A IPC. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. The bail application is allowed. (Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 6.9.2022 Gaurav Digitally signed by GAURAV KULSHRESTHA Date: 2022.09.13 15:55:38 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad