Point of Law: 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

JUDGMENT :

RAJEEV MISRA, J.

1. Heard Vivek Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.

2. Perused the record.

3. Instant bail application has been filed by applicant-Rohit seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 06 of 2020 under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B I.P.C. and Sections 66, 66D Information Technolocy (Amendment) Act, Police Station Cyber Crime, Police Station-Cyber Crime, District-Gautam Budh Nagar, during pendency of trial.

4. Perusal of record shows that in respect of certain incident which is alleged to have occurred on 18.09.2020 a delayed F.I.R. dated 19.09.2020 was lodged by first informant Inspector Vinod Panday and was registered as Case Crime No. 0006 of 2020 under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B I.P.C. and Sections 66, 66D Information Technolocy (Amendment) Act, Police Station Cyber Crime, Police Station-Cyber Crime, District-Gautam Budh Nagar. In the aforesaid F.I.R. five persons namely Amit Kumar, Rahul Kumar @ Indra Kumar Bairba, Krishna Pal, Rohit (applicant herein) and Mayank Tiwari have been nominated as named accused. In the F.I.R. first informant has alleged that fraud has been committed by accused person.

5. Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in above mentioned case crime number on account of police rivalry. Applicant is languishing in jail since 20.09.2020. Applicant has no criminal antecedent to his credit. In this regard, a categorical averment has been made in paragraph 16 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application. He further submits that that co-accused Mayank Tiwari, Rahul Kumar @ Indra Kumar and Amit Kumar have been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 14.12.2020, 08.12.2020 and 08.12.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 42667 of 2020, 42943 of 2020 and 42924 of 2020 respectively. Copy of the bail orders have been placed before this Court which are taken on record. It is further contended by learned counsel for applicant that case of present applicant is similar and identical to that of co-accused, Mayank Tiwari, Rahul Kumar @ Indra Kumar and Amit Kumar, hence applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity also. There is no possibility of the applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with witnesses and, in case, he is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. On the aforesaid factual premise, it is thus urged that, applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.

6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.

7. Having heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for the state and upon perusal of material brought on record, nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and dictum of Apex Court in Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and Another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that applicant has made out a case for bail.

8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant-Rohit involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on 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 shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. 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.

(ii) 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