Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 2021 (ALL)

Raj Kumar Jaiswal v. State of U. P.

2015-07-21

MANOJ MISRA

body2015
JUDGMENT Manoj Misra, J. Heard Sri Vinay Saran holding brief of Sri Saumitra Dwivedi for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 790 of 2014, Criminal Case No. 20 of 2014, under Section 8/21 N.D.P.S. Act, police station Dakshin Tola, District-Mau with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 3. The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that on 15.07.2014 the applicant alongwith his son in law Vinod Lal were on their way to Bahadurganj in search of a groom for the daughter of the applicant on a motorcycle no. UP-61-Q-1256 when they were stopped by the local police of police station Kotwali, District Ghaizipur for routine checking of the documents. It is alleged that upon finding that the applicants were having ATM cards, local police demanded illicit money and threatened the applicant as well as his son in law that if they do not grease their palm, they will be framed in such a case that they would remember throughout their life. It has been alleged that under coercion of police personnel namely CP. Najre Alam and CP. Santosh Singh, the son in law of the applicant had to withdraw a sum of Rs. 35,000/- from the ATM machine by using his as well as his wife's ATM cards between 7: 01: 44 p.m. till 7: 09: 14 p.m. It has been submitted that the said transaction is on the record and the CCTV camera footage of the ATM house reveals the presence of CP. Najre Alam behind the son in law of the applicant. It has been submitted that after extracting further money from the son in law of the applicant which he arranged with the help of his relatives, the son in law was released but further sum of money was demanded for releasing the applicant. It has been submitted that the son in law of the applicant made a fax message on 15.07.2014 at 10: 59 p.m. to the concerned authorities disclosing all the above facts. It has been submitted that when the applicant failed to satisfy the greed of police personnel, the police personnel showed recovery of 510 gms. It has been submitted that the son in law of the applicant made a fax message on 15.07.2014 at 10: 59 p.m. to the concerned authorities disclosing all the above facts. It has been submitted that when the applicant failed to satisfy the greed of police personnel, the police personnel showed recovery of 510 gms. of heroine from the possession of the applicant, and the said recovery is stated to have been made at 10: 20 p.m. on 15.07.2014. It has been submitted that on the complaint of the son in law of the applicant an inquiry was set up against the police personnel and on 20.10.2014 an inquiry report (Annexure XII to the Bail Application) has been submitted by the Additional Superintendent of Police, Mau indicting the police personnel including CP. Santosh Singh and CP. Najre Alam. It has been submitted that in the fard (memo of seizure) CP. Najre Alam and CP. Santosh Singh are part of the police party that effected seizure. It has been submitted that under the facts and circumstances of this case, the recovery allegedly made from the applicant in absence of a gazetted officer/Magistrate is not reliable. It has lastly been submitted that the applicant is in jail since 15.07.2014 and, in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute the fact that in respect of the conduct of few members of the police raiding party, complaint was made by the son in law of the applicant upon which an inquiry was held where the police personnel were indicted. 5. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail. 6. Let applicant Raj Kumar Jaiswal be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional 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.