Nand Lal v. State of U.P

Court No. - 78 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8538 of 2023 Applicant :- Nand Lal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Kakkar,Dhirendra Kumar Singh Rathor,Raghvendra Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant-accused, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶2The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-accused in case crime No.328 of 2018, under Section 13(1)

(b)/13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, police station Sungarhi, District Pilibhit with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶3It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant-accused that the applicant-accused is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant was working as Senior Cane Development Inspector in District Pilibhit. The allegation that applicant has acquired/amassed funds disproportionate to his known sources of income, is wholly false. As per prosecution version, the check period was shown from 28.11.1999 to

31.12.2016 and his income from all sources was shown Rs. 56,74,327, whereas, during corresponding period his expenses/assets were shown to the tune of Rs.85,88,841/- and by that way an amount of Rs.29,14,514/- was shown disproportionate to his income. Learned counsel submitted that the income of applicant from all sources has not been considered in accordance with law and that the expenses were exaggerated. Learned counsel has referred several documents and submitted that by considering the income of applicant and expenses in a correct way, no prima facie case is made out against applicant. It is further submitted that the investigation of the case is already complete and charge-sheet has been filed in Court and that applicant-accused is languishing in jail since 16.09.2022, having no criminal history, and thus, he has already undergone the detention of more than one year. It was submitted that in case the applicant-accused is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in trial.

¶4Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and submitted that there is evidence that applicant borne expenses/acquired assets more than his known source of income.

¶5Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations, period of custody and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that a case for bail is made out. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶6Let the applicant-accused Nand Lal involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

(i) The applicant-accused shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The applicant-accused shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

(iii) The applicant-accused shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

(iv) The applicant-accused shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

(v) The applicant-accused shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶7In case of breach of any of the above condition, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicant-accused in accordance with law. Order Date :- 31.10.2023 Neeraj High Court of Judicature at Allahabad