Awadh Ram Sachan v. State of U.P.

Srivastava, Birendra Singh Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J. Heard Sri Rakesh Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Abhishek Srivastava along with Sri Rohit Nandan, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 163 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 IPC, Police Station- Bidhnoo, District - Kanpur Nagar. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime. It is further submitted that the applicant was one of a partner in M/s Sachan Enterprises, who were doing the business of brick kilning for the said purpose Arazi No. 1291A, 1291B, 1294 and 1295 was purchased in the name of firm. The firm consists of three partners namely Awadh Ram Sachan, Rajesh Kumar Sachan and Indraveer Singh having equal share in the aforesaid property.

In the partnership agreement there was a specific clause that in the event of demise of any of the partner the share of the property in question will go the legal successor. It is next submitted that after 30 years of execution of partnership deed one of the partner namely Indraveer Singh, father of the informant expired on 17.07.2011 leaving behind his widow wife Nirupama Singh who also lost her life on 09.02.2015. In the meantime, as the purpose of establishment of partnership is become frustrated and the business activity of brick-kiln have lost their value, thereafter, an agreement was entered between the two partners namely applicant and one Rajesh Kumar Sachan with Atal Developers Private Limited in terms of selling of the property in shape of plots but the share of the father of the informant are intact. He further submits that the aforesaid agreement was made in terms of payment of Rs.

One Crore Sixty Lacs out of which a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- have been paid. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the aforesaid firm met with financial crunch due to loss in business, hence the Punjab National Bank from which M/S Sachan Enterprises took loan for his business activities filed the Suit No. 925 of 1995 against the firm and its partners for recovery of loan amount pending against them in which applicant, Rajesh Kumar Sachan and Indraveer Singh (father of the informant) took their appearance and filed their objection later on applicant and Rajesh Kumar Sachan filed an amended copy of their objection stating therein that they have dissolved their partnership firm by way of mutual consent and settle their respective accounts they have nothing to do whatsoever the dispute between the bank and M/S Sachan Enterprises as such they ceased their respective rights over the property belongs to M/S Sachan Enterprises and person liable to pay the bank debt, thereafter on the basis of aforementioned settlement the father of the informant have paid the entire disputed amount to the bank concerned and accordingly on the basis of mutual settlement suit no.

925 of 1995 has been dismissed as not pressed by the learned court below vide its order dated 05.03.2002, a copy of Suit No. 925 of 1995 filed by PNB as well as copy of objection (amended) filed by applicant and Rajesh Kumar Sachan in suit proceeding and a copy of order dated 05.03.2002 by the learned court below have been annexed as Annexure Nos. CA-1, 2 and 3 to the counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant categorically stated in his statement that the partnership firm is not dissolve as on date and is existence. It is further stated that he has not put an appearance before the court concerned where the PNB instituted a suit bearing no. 925 of 1995 as such no question arises for submission of application on his behalf. It is further stated that all the partners have jointly deposited the loan amount of the bank and accordingly in terms of loan so advance by the partners, the suit is being withdraw by the PNB against the partners.

He further submits that the Annexure No. CA-2 of the counter affidavit has not been accepted as no order have been passed amending the plaint before the court below to the best of his knowledge. He next submits that applicant is aged about 84 years and suffering from various ailments and is in jail since 20.07.2022. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, he may flee from the course of law or may, otherwise, misuse the liberty of bail and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is very bleak. On instruction, it is further stated that in order to show the bonafide of the applicant, the applicant is ready and willing to deposit the disputed amount before the court below. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

Let applicant Awadh Ram Sachan be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime Number on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to 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 misuse 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 fail 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. (v) The applicant shall deposit total amount of Rs. 40,00,000/- out of which a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- before his release and a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- within 45 days from the date of his release before the trial court, which shall be invested in a fixed term interest bearing account in some nationalized bank and shall be paid to the party concerned who succeeds in the trial. (vi) The property in question shall not be executed by any means by the applicant. Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 15.11.2022 Arti (Piyush Agrawal,J.) Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad