TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (2) TMI 1321
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....forged documents to establish their title to the subject land admeasuring 430 acres. The prosecution further states out of the total cheated sum of Rs. 2.10 crores, a sum of Rs. 1.10 cores has been paid through banking challans to the M/s. JMD Techinfra Private Limited and the balance was paid in cash. 4. I have heard Mr. Sunil K. Mittal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant and Mr. M.S. Oberoi, learned APP appearing on behalf of the official respondent. I have also been assisted by Mr. Aman Lekhi, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant in the subject FIR. 5. In a nutshell, it is contended on behalf of the prosecution as well as the complainant that the conduct of the applicant herein disentitles him from being enlarged on regular bail. The aforesaid conduct is summarized as follows:- a) The applicant had at the time of securing bail before the learned Additional Sessions Judge undertaken to refund the sum of Rs. 1.10 crores as recorded in the order dated 9th July, 2014 and subsequently, resiled from making the said payment for one reason or the other. b) Subsequent to the dismissal of the bail application by the Sessio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be a cause of great hardship. From time to time, necessity demands that some unconvicted persons should be held in custody pending trial to secure their attendance at the trial but in such cases, "necessity" is the operative test. In this country, it would be quite contrary to the concept of personal liberty enshrined in the Constitution that any person should be punished in respect of any matter, upon which, he has not been convicted or that in any circumstances, he should be deprived of his liberty upon only the belief that he will tamper with the witnesses if left at liberty, save in the most extraordinary circumstances. 23. Apart from the question of prevention being the object of refusal of bail, one must not lose sight of the fact that any imprisonment before conviction has a substantial punitive content and it would be improper for any court to refuse bail as a mark of disapproval of former conduct whether the accused has been convicted for it or not or to refuse bail to an unconvicted person for the purpose of giving him a taste of imprisonment as a lesson. 24. In the instant case, we have already noticed that the "pointing finger of accusation" against th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he same time, the punishment to which the party may be liable, if convicted, also bears upon the issue. Therefore, in determining whether to grant bail, both the seriousness of the charge and the severity of the punishment should be taken into consideration. 40. The grant or refusal to grant bail lies within the discretion of the court. The grant or denial is regulated, to a large extent, by the facts and circumstances of each particular case. But at the same time, right to bail is not to be denied merely because of the sentiments of the community against the accused. The primary purposes of bail in a criminal case are to relieve the accused of imprisonment, to relieve the State of the burden of keeping him, pending the trial, and at the same time, to keep the accused constructively in the custody of the court, whether before or after conviction, to assure that he will submit to the jurisdiction of the court and be in attendance thereon whenever his presence is required. xxxx xxxx 43. There are seventeen accused persons. Statements of witnesses run to several hundred pages and the documents on which reliance is placed by the prosecution, are volu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a Coordinate Bench in Sharad Kumar (supra) wherein in paragraph 22, 23 and 24 of the report it was observed as follows:- "22. Seen in the aforesaid backdrop, the question which arises for consideration is as to whether the petitioners who are charged for an offence of conspiracy under Section 120B IPC read with Section 409 IPC apart from other offences etc., which carry life imprisonment ought to be released on bail notwithstanding the fact that the order of the Apex Court is silent about the life imprisonment which the offence carries. In this regard, I feel merit in the contention of Mr. Ahmed, the learned senior counsel for the petitioners that although the Apex Court order does not find the mention of the word 409 IPC or the factum of life imprisonment which could be imposed for the said offence in the order, but it was cognizant of the fact that the all co-accused persons in the bail applications which were under its consideration were charged so. In addition to this, while dealing with the facts of the case in the batch of applications of Sanjay Chandra's case (supra) it had taken the charges against all the co-accused as a whole and not individual charges, ther....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that there are decisions of the Supreme appellate tribunal which do not attract the unanimous approval of all members of the judiciary But the judicial system only works if someone is allowed to have the last word and that last word, once spoken, is loyally accepted.' The better wisdom of the court below must yield to the higher wisdom of the court above. This is the strength of the hierarchical judicial system." 23. Similarly, in case titled M/s. Bayer India Ltd. & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors., (1993) 3 SCC 29'' the Apex Court has observed as under:- "While we certainly respect the independence of the High Court and recognize that it is a co-equal institution, we cannot but say, at the same time, that the constitutional scheme and judicial discipline requires that the High Court should give due regard to the orders of this Court which are binding on all courts within the territory of India." 24. Mr. Altaf Ahmed, the learned senior counsel has also cited number of other judgments to impress on this Court, the question that the omission to mention of Section 409 IPC or the absence of the word 'life imprisonment' in the Supreme C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....far as is relevant for the determination of the present bail application:- a) Gravity of the offence alone cannot be a decisive ground to deny bail. b) The protection of personal liberty has to be weighed with the object of securing attendance of the accused at trial. c) The accused is presumed to be innocent until he is found guilty and convicted. d) The Court must consider the unnecessary burden on the State to keep in custody a person who is yet to be proved guilty. e) Personal liberty is constitutionally protected unless necessity requires detention. f) The enlargement on bail is the rule and committal to jail, an exception. 11. At this stage, Mr. Aman Lekhi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant would urge that the expression "bail is the rule and committal to jail, an exception" is too expansive. 12. It is pertinent to mention here that each case, however, has to be decided in the context of its own facts and circumstances. A balanced approach must be taken and it is preferable to grant bail on stringent conditions rather than to keep an individual in detention for an indefinite period. The State is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... subject to further condition that the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him to disclose such facts to the court or to any other authority and subject to further condition that the applicant shall remain present before the court on the date fixed for hearing of the case. The applicant shall surrender his passport, if not already surrendered, before the trial court at the time of furnishing bail/surety bond. The application is disposed of accordingly." 14. In H.B. Chaturvedi vs. C.B.I. reported as 2010 3 JCC 2109 in paragraph 12 thereof, this Court observed as follows:- "12. Bail, it has been held in a catena of decisions, is not to be withheld as a punishment. Even assuming that the accused is prima facie guilty of a grave offence, bail cannot be refused in an indirect process of punishing the accused person before he is convicted. Furthermore, there is no justification for classifying offences into different categories such as economic offences and for refusing bail on the ground that the offence involved belongs to a particular category. It cannot, the....