The Allahabad High Court while allowing the bail application directed the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh to inquire into and take suitable action in accordance with the law against an Advocate for allegedly running a business.
A Single Bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Anil Kumar.
The application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case under Sections 379, 411 IPC, Section 66 of Information Technology Act, Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Saharanpur during pendency of the trial in the Court below.
The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged on 15.02.2022 by one Pradeep Kumar Sharma, Advocate, Civil Court, Saharanpur complaining that on 01.02.2022, some one had withdrawn Rs 500/- and Rs 15,000/- from the current account of the informant’s firm M/s Ayurherbs Remedies India.
On 09.05.2022, the Police arrested five accused persons, including the applicant on the basis of information received from a Mukhbir and 29 A.T.M cards and Rs 16,000/- are said to have been recovered.
In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case and he has no previous criminal history. After the arrest of the applicant, he has been implicated in as many as six cases.
The counsel for the applicant has submitted that co accused Sumit @ Mitta who was arrested along with the applicant has already been granted bail by means of an order dated 12.10.2022. Another co-accused Monu Kumar has also been granted bail by means of an order dated 18.10.2022. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 10.05.2022.
Per contra, the Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail.
“Having regard to the aforesaid facts and submissions and keeping in view the fact that the alleged fraudulent withdrawal was made on 02.02.2022 whereas the FIR has been lodged on 15.02.2022 and there is no explanation for the delay; the FIR was lodged against unknown person; the applicant has been implicated in the case on the basis of his alleged confessional statement recorded by the Police after his arrest in another case and two of the co-accused persons have already been granted bail in the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail”, the Court observed while allowing the bail application.
The Court ordered that,
Let the applicant Anil Kumar be released on bail in Case under Sections 379, 411 IPC, Section 66 of Information Technology Act, Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Saharanpur on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.
(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application before the Court seeking cancellation of the bail.
However, before parting with the case, the Court noted that the informant has described himself as an Advocate whereas he has mentioned in the FIR that he is proprietor of “M/s Ayurherbs Remedies India”; it appears from the FIR itself that the informant Advocate is running business also.
The Court directed the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh to make inquiry in the matter and take suitable action in accordance with law. A copy of this order be sent to the Secretary, Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh for taking suitable action.