Crime Today News
The Allahabad High Court has granted conditional anticipatory bail to former minister Dr Ram Asrey Singh Kushwaha in the demanding bribery case.
A Single Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Anticipatory Bail Application under section 438 CrPC filed by Dr Ram Ashrey Singh Kushwaha.
The Anticipatory Bail Application under section 438 Cr.P.C has been moved by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case under Sections 7/ 13 (1) (D)(2) and Section 15 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station Motipur, District Bahraich.
The facts of the case are that the applicant was State Forest Minister. Since Awadh Wood Products & Awadh Fertilizers Asam Road Mihipurwa, District Bahraich without following the government guidelines and norms was creating pollution by mixing harmful material in catechu (Kattha) causing harm to people life and agricultural land, therefore Jai Prakash Verma, District President/In-Charge Rashtriya Lokdal Bahraich/ Shravasti made a complaint addressed to the Prime Minister of India against Awadh Wood Products & Awadh Fertilizers Asam Road Mihipurwa, District Bahraich.
Thereafter, the applicant also made a complaint against Awadh Wood Products & Awadh Fertilizers Asam Road Mihipurwa, District Bahraich to the then Chief Minister vide his letter dated 31.01.2000.
Similarly, Ram Sajeevan, the then Member of Parliament also made a complaint in this regard vide his letter dated 14.03.2000 to the Prime Minister of India.
Aggrieved by the said complaints, Rajendra Singh Maheshwari, owner of the said factory made a complaint to Lokayukta against the applicant making allegation inter alia that the applicant and his P.R.O had made illegal demand of Rs 2,00,000/-.
On the said complaint, a First Information Report was lodged on 05.07.2002 after two years with regard to alleged incident dated 07.09.2000 under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Motinagar, District Bahraich, in which after culmination of investigation charge-sheet dated 19.01.2018 was submitted on which the concerned court below took cognizance on 22.09.2018.
Said charge-sheet was challenged by means of Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C, which was disposed of vide order dated 07.02.2019 granting liberty to the applicant to move discharge application through counsel within one month with further direction that no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant till the discharge application is pending before the concerned court below, but the discharge application of the applicant was rejected on 20.09.2019.
Thereafter, applicant preferred anticipatory bail application before the trial court, which has been rejected vide order dated 31.10.2019.
After that, applicant preferred Criminal Misc Anticipatory Bail Application before the Court, which was dismissed vide order dated 21.11.2019 on the ground that the same is not maintainable and the issue in this regard is subjudice before the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs State (NCT of Delhi).
The said order dated 21.11.2019 was challenged before the Apex Court in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal, in which interim protection was granted to the applicant for the period of six weeks vide order dated 10.02.2020. The said SLP later on disposed of vide order dated 07.08.2020 directing the applicant to surrender before the concerned trial court and to seek regular bail with further observation that till the disposal of regular bail the interim protection granted to the applicant vide order dated 10.02.2020 shall continue to operate.
Main substratum of argument of V.P Srivastava, Senior Counsel for the applicant is that the Apex Court while disposing of the Petition for Special Leave to Appeal filed by the applicant vide order dated 13.08.2020 has also granted interim protection to the applicant and the Court while entertaining the instant anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C has also granted interim protection vide order dated 29.09.2020, which is still operative.
It is next argued that in the complaint, the allegation of demand of bribe has been levelled against the applicant, but there is no credible evidence in this regard.
It is also submitted that the applicant has not misused the liberty of interim protection granted to him by the Apex Court vide order dated 13.08.2020 as well as by the Court vide order dated 29.09.2020. Applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. Under the facts of the case the applicant has apprehension of imminent arrest.
Lastly, it is submitted that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he would not misuse the liberty and will cooperate with the trial.
“Having heard the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find that it is not in dispute that the Apex Court, considering the facts and circumstances of case had granted interim protection to the applicant vide order dated 10.02.2020 and which was further directed to continue while passing the order dated 07.08.2020. The Apex Court while recalling the order dated 07.08.2020 passed further order dated 13.08.2020 observing that interim protection granted to the applicant vide order dated 10.02.2020 shall continue to operate till he approaches the High Court by means of anticipatory bail application. There is no material on record to presume the misuse of aforesaid interim protection granted to the applicant.
Looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of the counsel for the parties, reasonable apprehension of arrest of the applicant, taking into consideration the gravity of offence, nature of accusation and there being no possibility of his fleeing from justice as well as reasons noted above, the Court is of the view that prima facie the applicant has made out a case for granting anticipatory bail during trial.
In view of the above, the interim protection granted to the applicant vide order dated 29.09.2020 is hereby made absolute”, the Court observed while allowing the anticipatory bail application.
The Court ordered that,
In the event of arrest of the applicant -Dr Ram Ashrey Singh Kushwaha, involved in the aforesaid case shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court below with the following conditions :-
(i)That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court on each date unless necessary.
(ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) That the applicant shall not be involved in any criminal activity.
(iv) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the concerned Court below will be at liberty to cancel the anticipatory bail of the applicant after recording reasons.
(v) In case, it is found that the applicant has obtained this order concealing any material facts, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file an appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
Source | Powered by Yes Mom Hosting
