Allowed

Basant Lal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Oct 2022BAIL/27463/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application in a case concerning alleged financial irregularities and false implication. Relying on the testimony that the accused role was not held by the applicant and the lack of specific allegations in the FIR, the court granted bail on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below.

Basant Lal Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27463 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Basant Lal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

1.Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Mishra, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dinesh Kumar Srivastava, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.

¶6

2.The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 239 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 409 IPC, Police Station Mau, District Chitrakoot.

¶7

3.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of a first information report lodged on 17.12.2021 stating that a team constituted under orders passed by the Chief Development Officer, Chitrakoot and District Magistrate, Chitrakoot, had conducted an enquiry and it has recommended recovery of Rs. 1,79,504/- from concerned employees and initiation of departmental proceeding against them and the enquiry report had recommended lodging of an FIR against the applicant. It is alleged that the applicant had been found guilty for the financial irregularities amounting to Rs. 17,950/- only.

¶8

4.During investigation, statement of Programme Officer, MNREGA was recorded who stated that the duty of a Rozgar Sevak is to record daily attendance of labours and to get works carried out by them under MNREGA. The work of deletion of job card is done after convening an open meeting of Gram Sabha and after informing the cause of deletion to the concerned person. He categorically stated that the job cards are deleted through login of Programme Officer and the work of deletion of job cards is not done of by Rozgar Sevak.

¶9

5.It has been averred in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicant is an innocent person, he has been falsely implicated in the case and he is in jail since 16.04.2022. It has also been stated in the affidavit that there is no possibility of the applicant tampering with any evidence and in such circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. It is also stated in the affidavit that the applicant will not misuse the liberty of

¶10

bail and he will fully cooperate in the investigation.

¶11

6.In paragraph-9 of the rejoinder affidavit, the applicant's criminal history of two csaes has been disclosed - (i) Case Crime No. 213 of 2021, under Section 174-A IPC, P.S. Mau, District Chitrakoot, in which the applicant has been granted bail by means of an order dated 10.05.2022 passed by the Special Judge, POCSO Act / Additional Session Judge, Chitrakoot and (ii) Case Crime No. 103 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366, 452, 376-D, 506 IPC and 5(G) / 6 POCSO Act, P.S. Mau, District Chitrakoot, in which the applicant has been granted bail by means of an order dated 22.09.2022 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 13390 of 2022.

¶12

7.Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶13

8.Having considered the aforesaid facts and submissions and keeping in view the fact that the Programme Officer has categorically stated that the work of deletion of job cards is not done by Rozgar Sevak and also keeping in view the fact that the FIR does not contain any specific allegation of commission of any act, which may amount to an offence by the applicant, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the aforesaid case.

¶14

9.In light of the preceding discussion and without making any observation on the merit of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶15

10.Let the applicant Basant Lal be released on bail in Case Crime No. 239 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 409 IPC, Police Station Mau, District Chitrakoot on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to the following conditions:-

¶16

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶18

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶19

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such

¶20

facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

11.In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application before this Court seeking cancellation of the bail.

¶22

Order Date :- 10.10.2022 Ashish Pd.

¶23

Digitally signed by ASHISH PRASAD Date: 2022.10.11 11:31:05 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Basant Lal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Basant Lal 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anuj @ Karu Vs State of U.P.

Suneel Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra @ Jitendra Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Gurmehar Singh Chima Vs State of U.P.

Mukhtaruzzaman Khan Vs State of U.P.

Ram Rekha Singh Vs State of U.P.