HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. – 29
Case :- BAIL No. – 5725 of 2019
Applicant :- Afroj Alam (Second Bail)
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shivam Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This is the second bail application. The first bail application was dismissed on 29.5.2019 by this Court with liberty to the applicant to file afresh.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no allegation against the applicant in the entire FIR. It is contended that no charge sheet against the individuals have been filed who has committed the offence. However, no liability has been fastened upon the Company. No specific ingredient of Section 406 IPC is present against the applicant as no allegation of entrustment exists, which is sine qua non for the offence under under Section 406 IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.1694 of 2008 decided on 24.10.2008 in SectionR.Kalyani v. Janak C. Mehta wherein it has been held that the applicant cannot be charged with Sections 406, Section420 IPC in respect of offence alleged against the Company unless specific vicarious liability is laid down under a special statute and not a general law as the SectionIPC as such the applicant cannot be fastened with criminal liability. The applicant is languishing in jail since 21.2.2019.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and for the period for which he is in jail, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant Afroj Alam involved in Case Crime No.384 of 2016, under Sections 406, Section420, Section465 IPC., Police Station-Dhaurhara, District Lakhimpur Kheri 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(I). The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii). The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii). The applicant 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iv) 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.
(v) 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.
(vi) 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.
Order Date :- 18.7.2019