Manoj Verma v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt

This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.389 of 2024, under Sections 140(2), 308(2), 3(8) BNS, registered at P.S.-Chinhat, District -Lucknow.

As per contents of FIR, the incident is said to have taken place on 20.08.2024 at about 1.29 p.m. when the applicant along with co-accused had allegedly abducted the informant for the purposes of ransom.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the charges levelled against him and even otherwise a bare perusal of the FIR, only role attributed to the applicant was of accompanied the main accused Sanjay Yadav. It is submitted that the Manager of the Hotel where the informant is said to have been kept was one Ravindra Singh in whose account also the alleged ransom amount was paid and has been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc Bail Application No.12990 of 2024. It is submitted that the applicant is under incarceration since 12.10.2024.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed bail application with the submission that a bare perusal of FIR it reveals the involvement of applicant in the alleged incident. It is however submitted that there is no criminal history of the applicant and ransom amount was paid to one Ravindra Singh, who has already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, it appears that only role attributed to the applicant is of having accompanied the main accused Sanjay Yadav. As per FIR, the ransom amount was paid to the Manager of Hotel, who has been revealed as Ravindra Singh, has already been enlarged on bail as indicated hereinabove.

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 case of bail.

Let applicant, Manoj Verma, involved in the aforesaid case 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (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 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. (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. Order Date :- 26.3.2025 Renu/- RENU AGARWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench