Shreedhar Prasad v. State of U.P

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51004 of 2023 Applicant :- Shreedhar Prasad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Kumar Yadav,Ravi Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Dileep Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶3Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.56 of 2017, under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., and 3/4 Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, Police Station Chandi Nagar, District Baghpat, during the pendency of trial.

¶4As per prosecution case, the informant is stated to have deposited an amount of Rs.28,750/- with the company in which the applicant is the CEO at the behest of Anubhav Mittal.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. The applicant is not named in the FIR and his name has come up later on being the CEO of the company. Learned counsel has stated that in all two hundred FIRs have been instituted against the applicant and final report (charge-sheet) has been submitted in 176 cases and the applicant has been enlarged on bail in eight of those cases of similar nature.

¶6Several 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 applicant is languishing in jail since 21.5.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶7Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶8Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record and taking into consideration the fact the applicant is not named in the FIR, 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.

¶9Let the applicant-Shreedhar Prasad, 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.

¶10In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶11It 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 :- 15.12.2023 Vikas [Krishan Pahal, J.] High Court of Judicature at Allahabad