High Court · 2025
Case Details
Sri Manoj Kumar Shukla,Advocate, has put in his appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant and the same is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manoj Kumar Shukla,learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 832 of 2024, under sections 420 & 409 of the I.P.C., Police Station-Dewa, District -Barabanki. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that the applicant is the employee of the company in question, wherein the Directors and other persons are alleged to be involved in committing the offence, though, all the deposits are of the years 2015 to 2018 as is demonstrated vide annexure no. 5. He next added that the applicant is no way involved in administrative functioning of the company in question. He further submits that all the deposits are in the account of the company and no amount has ever been taken by the applicant either in cash or in his account. He submits that no criminal liability can be fastened upon the applicant as there is no mens-rea to commit any offence, as is alleged in the first information report and the applicant, being the employee of the company, has been implicated on the basis of the suspicion. He also added that there is no documentary evidence against the applicant so as to connect him in the instant matter and the applicant is cooperating in the investigation proceedings. He further added that there are as many as 11 cases criminal history of the applicant pertaining to similar nature, which is mentioned in paragraph no. 21 of the bail application and added that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 08-12-2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, Sri Manoj Kumar Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the first information report and he was involved alongwith other Directors of the company in committing cheat and fraud and there are as many as 11 cases criminal history of the applicant and as such, he is not entitled for bail. Learned AGA appearing for the State has also supported the contentions of the learned counsel for the complainant and submits that the applicant is not entitled for any relief. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is neither the Director nor he is involved in any administrative functioning of the company. It is undisputed fact that the deposits were in the account of the company and no amount has ever been incredited in the account of the applicant.Further the applicant was inducted in the company in the year 2019, whereas, as per annexure no. 5, the deposits are done in between the years 2015 to 2018. This court has also noticed the fact that 11 cases criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph no. 21 of the bail application and that too, is with respect to deposits of the same company. Further there is no complaint that the applicant is not cooperating in the investigation proceedings and he is languishing in jail since 08-12-2024 coupled with the fact that he has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant-Ashok Singh involved in the aforementioned crime 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) 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.; (4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 24.1.2025 AKS ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Sri Manoj Kumar Shukla,Advocate, has put in his appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant and the same is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manoj Kumar Shukla,learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 832 of 2024, under sections 420 & 409 of the I.P.C., Police Station-Dewa, District -Barabanki. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that the applicant is the employee of the company in question, wherein the Directors and other persons are alleged to be involved in committing the offence, though, all the deposits are of the years 2015 to 2018 as is demonstrated vide annexure no. 5. He next added that the applicant is no way involved in administrative functioning of the company in question. He further submits that all the deposits are in the account of the company and no amount has ever been taken by the applicant either in cash or in his account. He submits that no criminal liability can be fastened upon the applicant as there is no mens-rea to commit any offence, as is alleged in the first information report and the applicant, being the employee of the company, has been implicated on the basis of the suspicion. He also added that there is no documentary evidence against the applicant so as to connect him in the instant matter and the applicant is cooperating in the investigation proceedings. He further added that there are as many as 11 cases criminal history of the applicant pertaining to similar nature, which is mentioned in paragraph no. 21 of the bail application and added that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 08-12-2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, Sri Manoj Kumar Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the first information report and he was involved alongwith other Directors of the company in committing cheat and fraud and there are as many as 11 cases criminal history of the applicant and as such, he is not entitled for bail. Learned AGA appearing for the State has also supported the contentions of the learned counsel for the complainant and submits that the applicant is not entitled for any relief. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is neither the Director nor he is involved in any administrative functioning of the company. It is undisputed fact that the deposits were in the account of the company and no amount has ever been incredited in the account of the applicant.Further the applicant was inducted in the company in the year 2019, whereas, as per annexure no. 5, the deposits are done in between the years 2015 to 2018. This court has also noticed the fact that 11 cases criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph no. 21 of the bail application and that too, is with respect to deposits of the same company. Further there is no complaint that the applicant is not cooperating in the investigation proceedings and he is languishing in jail since 08-12-2024 coupled with the fact that he has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant-Ashok Singh involved in the aforementioned crime 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) 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.; (4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 24.1.2025 AKS ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench