Surendra Dubey Alias Manoj Dubey Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:61943

Court No. - 86

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1197 of 2025

Applicant :- Surendra Dubey Alias Manoj Dubey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shivam Kumar Modanwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit on behalf of State filed today in the Court, is taken on record

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶8

3.The prosecution story in brief is that on 07.09.2024, two persons came on a motor cycle to the informant and after purchasing 1 kilograms of fish had given a counterfeit currency of Rs. 500/-. On suspicion, the informant raised alarm, upon which they gave another note of Rs. 500/- and went away. On 11.09.2024 those persons after giving fake currency of Rs. 500/- had purchased fish. Upon alarm, the local people caught them. One of them told his name Ram Vinod Sharma but another accused ran away from the spot. From the possession of accused Ram Vinod Sharma counterfeit currency of Rs.500X10= 5000, demonetised counterfeit currency of Rs.500X90= 45000/- and Rs. Rs.1000X99= 99,000/and Rs. 1000/- counterfeit note of Nepal were recovered. Upon query, the apprehended person told the name of other accused who ran away, as Surendra Dubey.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is alleged to have ran away from the spot and his name surfaced by the main accused Ram Vinod Sharma. Learned counsel further submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant or on his pointing out. The applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case by the police only to show their good work. Several other submissions in order to

¶10

demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 10.11.2024.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence.

¶12

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, taking into account that recovery has been made from accused Ram Vinod Sharma, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view, that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Let applicant Surendra Dubey @ Manoj Dubey involved in Case Crime No.168 of 2024 under Sections 179, 180 of B.N.S. and Section 7 of the Specified Bank Notes (Vessation of Liabilities) Act, 2017, Police Station Thuthibari, District Maharajganj, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶14

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶15

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶16

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

¶17

v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18