https://www.taxtmi.com/css/info/rss_sitemap/rss_feed.css?v=1746094055 https://www.taxtmi.com Business/Tax/Law/GST/India/Taxation/Policies/Legal/Corporate Tax/Personal Tax/Vat Law/Legal Information/Tax Information/Legal Services/Tax Services Tax Management India. Com / MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved. One stop solution for Direct Taxes and Indirect Taxes https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461870 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461870 Seeking grant of regular bail - forgery, cheating, criminal conspiracy, and evidence tampering - reasonable or prima facie grounds to believe the petitioner's involvement in the alleged offences - registration of earlier FIR - No adversarial circumstances in status report - prolonged incarceration and trial to take time - grounds of parity - No apprehension by state authorities that petitioner may flee away or thwart cause of justice. Registration of earlier FIR - HELD THAT:- This Court is of the considered view that mere registration of other FIRs or pendency of another matter, cannot by itself, be made the basis for continuing the detention endlessly or for prolonging the incarceration of the petitioner. Denial of bail merely, due to the registration of other FIRs-matters, shall certainly amount to not only curtailing and depriving the personal liberty of the petitioner enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India but shall also amount to prolonging the custody, on basis of previously registered FIRs, which are still accusations and are yet to be examined, tested and proved during trial - in the instant case, once the State Authorities have not pointed out any adverse eventuality, in the Status Report, in relation to earlier FIRs-matters then, the plea for bail deserves to be accepted in peculiar facts herein. No adversarial circumstances in status report - HELD THAT:- Claim for bail needs to be accepted, for the reason, that the State Authorities have not pointed out any other adversarial circumstances i.e. either by way of expressing any apprehension that the petitioner will flee away or may tamper with the evidence or cause any inducement or threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case. In the absence of any such adversarial circumstances having been pointed out by the State Authorities, the claim for bail carries weight and the same is accordingly accepted. Bail - prolonged incarceration and trial to take time - Article 21 of the Constitution - HELD THAT:- Since the bail petitioner herein, has suffered incarceration for about six months now and even the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view, that further detention of petitioner, shall certainly amount to implicating the petitioner on mere accusation or conjectures at this stage. The action of the State Authorities is dehors the object of bail, which is neither punitive nor preventative. Prolonging imprisonment before conviction has a substantial punitive content, which certainly amounts to depriving or curtailing the personal liberty of the petitioner enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Parity - Co-accused released on bail - HELD THAT:- The State Authorities have not disputed the fact that other co-accused, namely Suresh Chander, Prakash Veer Chauhan, Sohan Lal and Damandeep Singh have been enlarged on bail, who as per Status Reports were alleged to have acted as agents of the main accused [Parikshit Azad], whereas once the petitioner, has neither been named in the complaint nor any substantial material is borne out from the material on record which are yet to be tested, examined and proved during the trial therefore, in these circumstances, the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail. No apprehension by state authorities that petitioner may flee away or thwart cause of justice - HELD THAT:- The Status Report does not indicate that the release of the petitioner will thwart the cause of justice and no apprehension expressing any possibility of the petitioner either fleeing away or cause any inducement, threat to any witness or persons acquainted with facts of case in any manner. However, this Court, still imposes the following stringent conditions against the bail petitioner. Conclusion - Taking into account the entirety of facts and circumstances and the material on record as borne out from the Status Report and the stand of the petitioner vis-à-vis the prosecution story and other factors i.e. that the petitioner is in custody for last six months; and prolongation of detention shall certainly violates personal liberty; and further detention shall defeat the principle of "Bail is a Rule and Jail is an Exception"; and once no reasonable grounds exists against the bail petitioner, even as per the Status Report, is running a medicine whole sale business, having substantial transaction of more than Rupees Two Crores during 2020-2024 vis-à-vis the accusation of having received a sum of Rs. 13,72,236/- approx. and when, the veracity of such accusation is yet to be tested, examined and proved during the trial in accordance with law; and the fact that the Investigation is complete; and the Challan-Final Police Report has been filed before the competent Court; and nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner therefore, this Court is of the considered view, that any further detention or prolongation thereof shall certainly amount to pre-trial incarceration by way of punishment on the basis of mere accusation, which are yet to be proved, shall amount to incarcerating the petitioner on the basis of mere surmises-allegations. In these circumstances, the petitioner, at this stage, is entitled to be enlarged on bail. The State Authorities are directed to release the petitioner, on bail, subject to fulfilment of conditions imposed - bail application allowed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 09 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530