The Allahabad High Court has granted bail to Vinod Bihari Lal, director of Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Technology And Sciences.
A Single Bench of Justice Piyush Agrawal passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Vinod Bihari Lal.
The bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case under Sections 307/ 323/ 506/ 325/ 467/ 471/ 120-B IPC, Police Station – Naini, District – Prayagraj.
Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime.
He further submitted that the applicant was not named in the FIR. The FIR was lodged with an inordinate delay without there being any plausible explanation for the same.
He also submitted that the applicant was working as Director, Administration of the Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Technology & Sciences and the first informant was an ex-student of the said University, who has not completed his degree course and pressurizing the Administration to issue degree without clearing the examination, to which the University administration refused, due to which the first informant bears personal grudge with the applicant.
Counsel for the applicant said that the applicant is nowhere connected with the case. Since the place of occurrence is mentioned as the end of Yamuna Bridge, the repairing work was going on and the eyewitness, i.e, the security guard, was present, who specifically denied the occurrence of the incident as alleged in the FIR and the statement of the first informant. The security guard has specifically mentioned that due to an accident, the first informant on a scooter, had fallen down.
He further said that in the CCTV recording as investigated by the Investigating Officer, the first informant in his FIR has stated that he was being followed by two bikers, but no such video footage was available.
He also submitted that the Compounder of Global Health Care Hospital stated in his statement that the injured informant has walked upto the dispensary/place of Doctor and his injuries were simple in nature.
He further submitted that one of the independent witnesses, who is having shop near the bridge, also denied the incident as alleged in the FIR. He further submitted that on the subsequent statement of the informant, section 325 IPC was added and section 308 IPC was deleted.
AAG submitted that the injuries are grievous in nature, which are evident from the statement of the Doctor. The injuries and the statements of the eyewitnesses corroborate the prosecution story as well as the version of the FIR. The applicant was brought to the hospital in serious condition.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the records and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail, the Court observed.
The Court ordered that,
Let applicant, namely, Vinod Bihari Lal, be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime Number on furnishing personal bond and two heavy sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will surrender his passport, if any, and not leave the country without permission of the trial court concerned. In case, he has no passport or in case he has already surrendered his passport, he will file an affidavit to that effect before the trial court prior to release him on bail.
(ii) The applicant will deposit Rs 10 lacs before the trial court prior to release him on bail and the same shall be kept in an interest bearing account of some nationalized bank and shall be forfeited in case of violation of any of the conditions imposed by this order.
(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that the applicant 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.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. In case of absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against the applicant under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(v) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure the applicant’s 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 the applicant, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(vi) 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 CrPC. 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 the applicant in accordance with law.
vii) The applicant shall appear in person before the court concerned on any date in the 1st week of every month.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the bail of the applicant shall be deemed to be cancelled without any further reference of this Court and the court concerned shall release the amount of Rs 10 lacs deposited by the applicant in favour of the State, forthwith.