High Court
Case Details
1 Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86097 Reserved On:- 14.05.2025 Delivered On:- 21.05.2025 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28690 of 2024 Applicant :- Manjoor Ansari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Singh,Praveen Kumar Singh,Rupesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kaushal Kishor Hon'ble Siddharth, J. 1.
Legal Reasoning
Heard Shri Vivek Mishra, holding brief of Shri Anjani Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Kaushal Kishor, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. 2. The prosecution case is that on 30.04.2023 at dawn her daughter, namely, Swarnlata Patel, who is residing at Saray Nandan, Police Station- Bhelupur went missing. Her mobile was found to be switched off. After search he came to know that she is on the way to Ramnagar Bridge and trying to jump from river. Then her son and his friend reached there and took her to the home and it was told by her daughter that she borrowed money from Ashutosh Singh, Manish and Sunita and after returning the entire amount they again demanded money and also took signature over blank cheque and stamp paper and they stated that if you do not return the aforesaid amount presently then take a L.I.C policy from Ashok and his target shall completed. Forcibly she was given L.I.C. policy and when she could not deposit the premiums then they told that if you not deposit the installments then give fine of Rs. 5,000/- per day and if you do not give the same then his friend namely, Manjoor, who is posted in police 2 department, will get her arrested. Applicant, Manjoor, called her and used filthy language and on 23.04.2024 when she left her house he forced her to meet him and took her in vehicle to Neel Kamal Garden House, Varanasi and made physical relation with her and video and also threatened her of dire consequences. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim was medically examined before District Women Hospital, Varanasi on 23.05.2024 and as per medical report no injury was found and the same was incorporated in C.D. Parcha No. 4 dated 27.05.2024. During the course of investigation, the victim, namely, Swarnlata Patel, was produced before the learned Magistrate for recording of her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C on 06.06.2024. In her statement she repeated the version of first information report and supported the prosecution story. During the course of investigation, the investigating officer also recorded the statement of Dr. Priyanka, under Section 161 Cr.P.C on 15.07.2024 and he stated that no injury was found on the body of victim. The fact of the case is otherwise than as alleged. Victim namely, Swarnlata, had taken a sum of Rs. 12,00,000/- for purchasing the land from applicant which was to be returned within one month and in this regard she had given a cheque no. 000055 dated 23.04.2024 a sum of Rs. 12,00,000/-. Then applicant deposited the aforesaid cheque in his bank account which was dishonoured on 19.06.2024 due to insufficient funds. Then applicant send her a legal notice dated 29.06.2024 through his counsel. 4. Counsel for the applicant has also submits that the applicant is perfectly innocent and he has committed no such alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in present false case. The applicant is not previously convicted and is a person of good character and conduct and surrendered before court below on 12.07.2024 and is languishing in jail 3 since 12.07.2024. As per best knowledge of deponent, the applicant has no other criminal history. 5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A have vehemently opposed the bail application. They have submitted that the allegations made against the applicant in the F.I.R are correct. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case on account of dispute between the informant and co-accused persons. 6. After hearing the rival submissions, this court finds that on account of monetary dispute of informant with the accused persons, she has lodged the F.I.R and the allegations made against the applicant and co-accused do not seem credible. 7. 8. On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant, Manjoor Ansari, involved in Case Crime No. 89 of 2024, under Sections- 376, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station- Ramnagar, District- Varanasi, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court 4 concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) 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. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) 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. (v) 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. 5 10. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 21.05.2025 Rohit Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad