Allowed

Yogendra Narayan Dubey v. State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home

Allahabad HC6 Jul 2022/15646/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 409 IPC, the High Court allowed bail to an applicant accused of embezzlement who alleged false implication, citing Article 21 and citing Dataram Singh. The applicant was required to furnish a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to specified conditions.

Yogendra Narayan Dubey Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15646 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Yogendra Narayan Dubey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Kumar Singh,Alok Kr. Misra,Pawan Kumar Sharma,Ripu Daman Shahi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Alok Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. Surendra Singh, learned AGA for the State and also perused the material placed on record.

¶6

By means of the present application, the applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 114 of 2019, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 409 IPC, Police Station- Tarabganj, District- Gonda, during the pendency of trial.

¶7

As per prosecution story, an amount of Rs.9,98,934/- is said to have been embezzled and usurped by the employees of Gram Panchayat of village Ramapur in connivance with Gram Pradhan.

¶8

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is Technical Assistant in the concerned Gram Panchayat and his job is only to measure the parameters of the land, ponds, etc. He has nothing to do with the up-keeping or distribution of any money whatsoever. Learned counsel has further stated that eight charges in all were framed by the Enquiry Officer and the Gram Pradhan has found guilty in all those charges and the applicant has been falsely implicated in one of the charges i.e. charge no.8 only. The applicant is languishing in jail since 9.12.2021 having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial.

¶9

Per contra, Dr. Surendra Singh, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and

¶11

another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant- Yogendra Narayan Dubey, who is involved in the aforementioned case crime number 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶13

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶14

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶15

(iii) 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., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶19

Order Date :- 6.7.2022 Siddhant

¶20

Digitally signed by SIDDHANT SAHU Date: 2022.07.07 10:30:40 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Yogendra Narayan Dubey v. State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogendra Narayan Dubey v. State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home

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

Guddu Mishra @ Rajesh Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Shyam Lal Vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary (Home) Civil Secretariat Lucknow

Mewa Lal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Jagdish Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ravindra Kishore Vs State of U.P.Thru. Special Investigation Team (S.I.T.) Lko.

Shahbaaz @ Lodar Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow