Suresh Chandra Garg v. State of U.P

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47212 of 2023 Applicant :- Suresh Chandra Garg Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- B.K. Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri B.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.P. Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶3Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 692 of 2017, under Sections 420, 448 IPC, Police Station Jhunsi, District Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial.

¶4As per prosecution story, the named accused persons, Manager Sunil Agarwal, Shashi Kant and the applicant are stated to have cheated few persons by selling the illegal land which was not in their possession for which they do not hold any title thereon whatsoever. The said land was even demolished by the Authorities.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in the case. He has filed Article of Association/Memorandum of the Company, namely, Apra Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Allahabad as annexure-2 to the affidavit accompanying the bail application. Co-accused Sunil Kumar Agarwal and Shashi Kant are the Directors in it. The applicant has nothing to do with the same. It is further stated that three cases of similar nature have been instituted against the applicant. The applicant has no knowledge of those cases. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The criminal history of the applicant has been duly explained in para-16 of the affidavit accompanying the bail application. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.09.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶6Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶7Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, 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.

¶8Let the applicant-Suresh Chandra Garg, who is involved in aforementioned 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.

¶9In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶10It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 24.11.2023 Mukesh Kr. (Krishan Pahal,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad