Allowed

Abhay Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Allahabad HC25 Nov 2022/12299/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to the applicant in a forgery and cheating case. The court noted the applicant managed thousands of centers with no prior record, and the investigating officer confirmed no OTP was generated on the applicant's number, indicating no direct link to the offense.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding appearance and conduct during trial.

Abhay Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 27

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12299 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Abhay Srivastava Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko.

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Vikram Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

In compliance of the order dated 24.11.2022 the Investigating Officer of the case is present before this Court and his presence is exempted till further order of this Court.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh-I, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 495 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 66D of I.T. Act, P.S.Kotwali Nagar, District - Gonda.

¶9

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He next added that in fact the applicant is District Manager Common Service Centre and he is running as much as 3500 centres at District Gonda and in all the centres he has constituted a whatsoever group. He submits that in one of the whatsapp group, someone has sent a link though the same is out of control with the present applicant and he was not having the knowledge that in fact the aforesaid link has been sent for committing the forgery and, as such, criminal intent is missing in the instant matter. He added that Investigation Officer has failed to connect the applicant in the present matter without all reasonable doubts. He next added that in fact the offence which is said to be committed by the applicant as asserted in the FIR, has not been committed by the present applicant and someone has sent the link and thereafter the same was misused by some other person and being group admin of the aforesaid whatsapp group, the FIR has been lodged against the present applicant. He next added that there is no complaint out of all the 3500 centres and groups which are running in District Gonda and there is only one instance wherein the FIR has been lodged and certain allegation of committing offence has been made against the present

¶10

applicant. It is specifically mentioned in paragraph 27 of the bail application that applicant has no previous criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 03.10.2022. In case he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail and submits that since the present applicant was running the whatsapp group wherein the aforesaid forged link was dropped and, as such, he cannot deny his responsibility and therefore, he has committed the aforesaid offence. On last occasion i.e., on 24.11.2022, the Investigating Officer of the case crime concerned has been called upon as the instructions as per the order dated 17.11.2021 was not provided and in compliance of the same, the Investigating Officer is present in this Court. On a query being asked, the Investigating Officer has responded that so far as the OTPwhich is said to be generated after the link which was run by the present applicant, was not over there.

¶12

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it is evident that applicant is District Manager Common Service Centre and as much as 3500 centres are being run by the present applicant and there is no such allegation on any of the centres or the whatsapp group likewise the present matter; further link which was dropped by someone else, was never used by the present applicant, as per statement of Investigation Officer the OTP was not generated on the mobile number of the applicant; further it seems that someone else has brought the link which was received later on but there seems to be no connection with the present applicant; further there is no other criminal history against the applicant; coupled with the fact that he is languishing in jail since 03.10.2022, thus without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶13

Let the applicant- Abhay Srivastava involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶14

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶15

(2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient

¶16

cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶17

(3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and

¶18

(4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶20

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶21

Order Date :- 25.11.2022 Ujjawal

¶22

Digitally signed by UJJAWAL PARJAPATI Date: 2022.11.30 09:43:31 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Abhay Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhay Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naushad Sheikh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Riyaj Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lko.

Roshan Lal Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Ravi Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Kamta Kashyap Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. U.P. Lko.