Aniruddh Modanwal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Court No. -15 Case :-CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. -13087 of 2024 Applicant :-Aniruddh Modanwal Opposite Party :-State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :-Mahendra Pratap Singh,Ranjit Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :-G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 112, 318(4) BNS and 66D Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 and Section 13 (5) & 11 (7) of Uttar Pradesh Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Ordinance/Act, 2024, P.S. Ghazipur, District, Lucknow. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him and on the basis of suspicion only, he has been connected with the instant matter. He added that during investigation, it was found that the account which is said to be used while transaction is in the name of Manu Kumar Srivastava and the transaction is not excessive which could substantiate the allegation made in the F.I.R. He also submits that except apart some mobile phones mentioned in the F.I.R. there is no substantial evidence against the applicant and the applicant is 19 years of age and he is pursuing the Common University Entrance Test He also added that the applicant has no previous criminal history, which has been explained in para 25 of the bail application and the charge sheet has been filed as such there is no possibility of fleeing away or tampering with the evidence and the applicant is languishing in jail since 24.8.2024 and in case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the applicant is involved in committing the aforesaid offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on bail. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him and on the basis of suspicion only, he has been connected with the instant matter; during investigation, it was found that the account which is said to be used while transaction is in the name of Manu Kumar Srivastava and the transaction is not so which may substantiate the allegation made in the F.I.R.; except apart some mobile phones mentioned in the F.I.R. there is no substantial evidence against the applicant; charge sheet has been filed as such there is no possibility of fleeing away or tampering with the evidence; the applicant has no previous criminal history of the applicant, which has been explained in para 25 of the bail application; the applicant is languishing in jail since 24.8.2024; and he has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if granted and would co-operate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail. Let the applicant Aniruddh Modanwal involved in the aforementioned crime 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:-

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

(2) 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. He 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;

(3) 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.; and

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 19.12.2024 Ram Murti High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench