Akash Srivastava@ Ankit Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 77

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2841 of 2022

Applicant :- Akash Srivastava@ Ankit Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prateek Kumar Srivastava,Rajeev Nayan Singh,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Shri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Rajeev Nayan and Shri Prateek Kumar Srivastava,learned Advocate, Counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 505 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 201 IPC and 68 I.T. Act, Police Station Shahpur, District Gorakhpur.

¶7

On 24-11-2021 an F.I.R was lodged by Inspector Satya Prakash Singh, Incharge S.T.F against five accused persons including the applicant alleging that a solver gang was acting for helping the candidates in competitive examination conducted at various centers. A raid is alleged to have been conducted and some computers, laptops and related goods were recovered. One of the co-accused namely Santosh Kumar Srivastava is said to have informed that a sum of Rs.5.50 lacs have been given to the applicant which money was taken from a candidate and the said amount was recovered from the applicant.

¶8

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is employed under the State Government and is posted as 'Lekhpal'. In the year 2018 with the aid and assistance of his younger brother and mother a computer institute was opened under the name and style of Anita Online Digital Center, Amrapali. Anita is the mother of accused-applicant. Anita Online Digital Center was registered with GST Department and copy of the Regional Inspection Report has been annexed with the affidavit which indicates the GSTIN/UIN of Anita Online Digital Center. It was working for Tata Consultancy Services and a copy of the work order dated 28-01-2019 issued by the aforesaid company has also been annexed. The applicant has stated that his mother was suffering from several ailments including heart problem since 2017 for which she is being treated in Medanta Hospital, Gurgaon.

¶9

During the period of spread of Covid-19 under an apprehension

¶10

that huge sum of money might be suddenly be required for her treatment, the father of the applicant Uma Shanker Lal Srivastava withdrew a sum of Rs.9 lacs from his Provident Fund towards the apprehended medical expenses on 19-03-202. A copy of the bank statement has also been annexed which shows the aforesaid transaction. The amount of Rs.5,50,000/recovered from the applicant was the amount remaining out of the aforesaid sum of Rs. 9,00,000/- after incurring the medical expenses of treatment of the applicant's mother Anita Srivastava.

¶11

The applicant has stated that through this institute, online examinations were being conducted. However, during the spread of Covid-19, the aforesaid business collapsed and the computer center was closed down. The working computer systems were sold away and useless materials were lying stored in a room, which were seized in the raid. Amongst the goods seized only two laptops were found working, one of which was the official laptop issued to the applicant by the Government and the other one belongs to the applicant's brother Saurabh Kumar, which he had purchased from E.M.I.

¶12

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that similarly placed four co-accused persons named in the F.I.R. Santosh Kumar Yadav, Vinay Kumar Yadav, Neeraj Lakda and Abhinash Yadav have already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 02.02.2022, 15.02.2022, 07.02.2022 and 22.02.2022 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 1488 of 2022, 55926 of 2021, 2744 of 2022 and 2234 of 2022 respectively. Therefore, the applicant is entitled for bail on the ground of parity.

¶13

There is no possibility of the applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that there is no criminal history of the applicant and he is languishing in jail since 24.11.2021.

¶14

Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but he could not dispute the aforesaid fact that coaccuseds have already been released on bail.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material on record and the fact that similarly placed aforesaid co-accused have been enlarged on bail, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Akash Srivastava @ Ankit be released on bail in Case Crime No. 505 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467,

¶16

468, 471, 201 IPC and 68 I.T. Act, Police Station Shahpur, District Gorakhpur be released on bail on his/her 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 :-

¶17

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial.

¶18

(ii) 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. 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.

¶19

(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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

(iv) The applicant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.

¶21

(v) 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

Order Date :- 16.3.2022

¶23

pks

¶24

Digitally signed by PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.03.16 17:08:03 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Akash Srivastava@ Ankit v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akash Srivastava@ Ankit v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jawaharlal Yadav Vs Heeralal Yadav

Lokendra Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

M/S Hiba Industries Dandi Hamir Kasba Richha Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pawan Vs State of U.P.

Tahiyaat Ali @ Bachcha Vs State of U.P. through Its Principal Secretary Home

Jai Singh Vs Union of India