Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 2544 (ALL)

Jitendra Kumar v. State of U. P.

2024-12-17

ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA

body2024
JUDGMENT : Ashutosh Srivastava, J. 1. Heard Shri Gyanendra Kumar, learned counsel, under the authority of Shri Sushil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri S.K. Rai, learned A.G.A. Ist, for the State and perused the record. 2. This bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Jitendra Kumar, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 285 of 2024, under Sections-420 and 409 I.P.C. Police Station-Seepari Bazar, District-Jhansi. 3. Shri S.K. Rai, learned A.G.A.-Ist, at the very outset submits that there is a manipulation in paragraph no. 4 of an affidavit, annexed as Annexure no. 9 to the affidavit filed in support of bail application, moved before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jhansi as in original copy of the said affidavit, only it is mentioned as has an intention to obtain bail by playing fraud with the Court. 4. On comparison, of the paragraph no. 4 of the aforesaid affidavit, from certified copy, find place in the Case Diary, with paragraph no. 4 of the affidavit annexed as Annexure no. 9 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application the aforesaid manipulation is found apparent. 5. Recently, Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Kusha Duruka vs. State of Odisha , 2024 INSC 46 while dealing with the prerequisites to be mandatorily mentioned in the application filed for grant of bail and effect of non mentioning of details of previous bail applications and order in all bail applications and approaching the Court suppressing material facts and taking recourse to fraud by manipulating the evidence etc. relying upon its earlier decision reported in Dalip Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others , 2010 (2) SCC 114 observed as under:- "1. For many centuries Indian society cherished two basic values of life i.e. "satya" (truth) and "ahinsa" (non-violence). Mahavir, Gautam Buddha and Mahatma Gandhguided the people to ingrain these values in their daily life. Truth constituted an integral part of the justice- delivery system which was in vogue in the per-Independence era and the people used to feel proud to tell truth in the courts irrespective of the consequences. However, post-Independence period has seen drastic changes in our value system. Truth constituted an integral part of the justice- delivery system which was in vogue in the per-Independence era and the people used to feel proud to tell truth in the courts irrespective of the consequences. However, post-Independence period has seen drastic changes in our value system. The materialism has overshadowed the old ethos and the quest for personal gain has become so intense that those involved in litigation do not hesitate to take shelter of falsehood, misrepresentation and suppression of facts in the court proceedings. 2. In the last 40 years, a new creed of litigants has cropped up. Those who belong to this creed do not have any respect for truth. They shamelessly resort to falsehood and unethical means for achieving their goals. In order to meet the challenge posed by this new creed of litigants, the courts have, from time to time, evolved new rules and it is now well established that a litigant, who attempts to pollute the stream of justice or who touches the pure fountain of justice with tainted hands, is not entitled to any relief, interim or final." 6. Again in Moti Lal Songara vs. Prem Prakash @ Pappu and another , 2013 (9) SCC 199 , the Apex Court considering the issue regarding concealment of facts before the Court observed that Court is not laboratory where children come to play and opined as under:- "19. The second limb of the submission is whether in the obtaining factual matrix, the order passed by the High Court discharging the accused-respondent is justified in law. We have clearly stated that though the respondent was fully aware about the fact that charges had been framed against him by the learned trial Judge, yet he did not bring the same to the notice of the revisional court hearing the revision against the order taking cognizance. It is a clear case of suppression. It was within the special knowledge of the accused. Any one who takes recourse to method of suppression in a court of law, is, in actuality, playing fraud with the court, and the maxim supressio veri, expression faisi , i.e., suppression of the truth is equivalent to the expression of falsehood, gets attracted. We are compelled to say so as there has been a calculated concealment of the fact before the revisional court. We are compelled to say so as there has been a calculated concealment of the fact before the revisional court. It can be stated with certitude that the accused- respondent tried to gain advantage by such factual suppression. The fraudulent intention is writ large. In fact, he has shown his courage of ignorance and tried to play possum. 20. The High Court, as we have seen, applied the principle "when infrastructure collapses, the superstructure is bound to collapse". However, as the order has been obtained by practising fraud and suppressing material fact before a court of law to gain advantage, the said order cannot be allowed to stand." 7. Then again the Apex Court in the case of Saumya Chaurasia vs. Directorate of Enforcement , 2023 INSC 1073 made following observations:- "14. It cannot be gainsaid that every party approaching the court seeking justice is expected to make full and correct disclosure of material facts and that every advocate being an officer of the court, though appearing for a particular party, is expected to assist the court fairly in carrying out its function to administer the justice. It hardly needs to be emphasized that a very high standard of professionalism and legal acumen is expected from the advocates particularly designated Senior advocates appearing in the highest court of the country so that their professionalism may be followed and emulated by the advocates practicing in the High Courts and the District Courts. Though it is true that the advocates would settle the pleadings and argue in the courts on instructions given by their clients, however their duty to diligently verify the facts from the record of the case, using their legal acumen for which they are engaged, cannot be obliviated." 8. Considering the above law as laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court as also the facts and circumstances of the case at hand, and the manipulation in the affidavit, placed before this Court, with an intention to obtain bail order in his favour by deceiving the Court, the present bail application is rejected with cost of Rs. 50,000/- upon the applicant which is to be deposited within 20 days, from today, before the Registrar General, High Court, Allahabad, who will thereafter forward the same to the High Court Legal Services Committee. 50,000/- upon the applicant which is to be deposited within 20 days, from today, before the Registrar General, High Court, Allahabad, who will thereafter forward the same to the High Court Legal Services Committee. In case, the amount of cost is not deposited by the applicant within the stipulated time, the Registrar General shall take necessary steps for recovery of the amount in accordance with law. 9. The Registrar General and the High Court Legal Services Committee be informed of this order.