Allowed

Arun Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Jun 2020ABAIL/2442/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the Single Judge granted bail to the applicant in a case involving misappropriation of public funds. The applicant was released on furnishing a personal bond and sureties, subject to conditions ensuring availability for interrogation and non-interference with witnesses, pending the submission of the police report.

What did the court decide?

Release on anticipatory bail upon arrest, subject to a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, and specific conditions including availability for interrogation and non-interference with witness

Arun Kumar Dubey Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

In Chamber

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2442 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Arun Kumar Dubey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

This bail application is being disposed of as per the order dated 4.4.2020 of Hon'ble the Chief Justice.

¶6

Notice of this application was served on the Government Advocate on 4.3.2020 but as yet no objection has been filed on behalf of the State.Notice on Government Advocate is sufficient as per section 438(3) Cr.P.c. (U.P. Amendment).Hence this application is being finally decided.

¶7

The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Arun Kumar Dubey , in Case Crime No. 94 of 2020, under Sections 420, 408, 409 I.P.C. , Police Station - Kotwali Auraiya, District - Auraiya.

¶8

The allegation against the applicant is that he has misappropriated the public money given to him for the development work in the village, being proprietor of contractor firm.

¶9

It has been averred in the affidavit in support of anticipatory bail application that chairman of Zila Panchyat demanded commission in the funds sanctioned for construction and thereafter dispute took place between the applicant and chairman.Chairman made complaint against the applicant and he approached this court and this court vide Writ -C No. 39321 of 2019 directed the authorities to consider the reply of the applicant and pass appropriate orders.After receiving order passed by this court, the present First Information Report was lodged.

¶10

Applicant has claimed that he has not committed any offence but has been falsely implicated in this

¶11

case because he has refused to fall in line.It has been averred in paragraph-16 of the affidavit in support of this application that he has no criminal history. Applicant has definite apprehension of his arrest by the police.

¶12

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and his antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case for the limited period considering the exception considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98 .

¶13

In the event of arrest of the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required;

¶15

(ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office;

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶17

(iv) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶18

(v) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶19

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶20

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law, expeditiously, independently without being prejudiced by any observations made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶21

The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of this Court before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶22

Order Date :- 5.6.2020 Atul kr. sri.

Arun Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harish Vs State of U.P.

Qadir Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Kavita Devi Vs State of Up

Alok Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Gagandeep Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sultan Vs State of U.P. and Another