Point of Law: Applicant shall not tamper with prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing witnesses, during investigation or trial.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Prem Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Om Prakash Singh with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.509 of 2017, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, I.P.C., P.S. Sarnath, District Varanasi, during pendency of the trial.

3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The present dispute pertains to management of society and in this regard Writ 'C' No.35651 of 2017 is pending before this Court. The dispute is of the year 2017 but FIR has been lodged in the year 2018. There is one year delay in lodging of F.I.R. for which no plausible explanation has been given. The applicant is member of the society and Trust and informant is President of the Trust and the dispute relates to management. Learned counsel for the applicant next submitted that co-accused Ram Awadh Singh Yadav, Rakesh Singh and Smt.Arti Devi have been granted bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 18.01.2023, 04.05.2022 & 31.01.2023. Learned counsel for the applicant next submits that the applicant having better case for getting bail on account of parity. Applicant has explained criminal history in Para13 of the bail application. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. The applicant is not a previous convict. The applicant is languishing in jail since 05.12.2022 and in case he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and argued that the applicant is involved in withdrawing the amount and he should not be granted bail.

5. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

6. Let the applicant, Om Prakash Singh, who is involved in the aforesaid case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

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

2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.