Allowed

Ravindra Kumar Srivastava Alias Jhablu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Nov 2022BAIL/28801/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed bail to Ravindra Kumar Srivastava in a cheating and forgery case involving alleged money laundering. The Court found the accused innocent of being a post office employee, noting the main fraud involved forged documents by a co-accused who had already been granted anticipatory bail.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding tampering with evidence and influencing witnesses.

Ravindra Kumar Srivastava Alias Jhablu Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28801 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ravindra Kumar Srivastava Alias Jhablu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kameshwar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Birendra Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Kameshwar Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dinesh Kumar Srivastava, the learned Additional Government Advocate, Sri Shyamu Shukla, Advocate holding brief of Sri Birendra Singh, the learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 0085 of 2022, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 411 IPC, Police Station Karvi, District Chitrakoot during pendency of the trial in the Court below.

¶7

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged by the four informants against the applicant and his wife Smt. Suvi Srivastava alleging that the informants' had made various investments in the Head Post Office, Karvi in the shape of fixed deposits/recurring deposits and the money was deposited at the counter of the Post Office and later on it transpired that all the pass books and receipts etc. were forged and records of the same were not available in the Post Office.

¶8

It is alleged that the applicant had projected that his wife Suvi Srivastava was an agent in the Post Office and fraud was committed in collusion with the officers and employees of the Post Office.

¶9

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case and that he has no criminal history.

¶10

The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.03.2022.

¶11

Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate as well as Sri Shyamu Shukla, Advocate holding brief of Sri Birendra Singh, the learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail and have

¶12

submitted that the main allegation is levelled against applicant and case of the applicant is not at par with the co-accused Suvi Srivastava, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶13

There is no allegation that the applicant is an employee or officer or agent in the Post Office. The applicant's wife coaccused Suvi Srivastava regarding whom there is an allegation that she had been projected to be an agent in the Post Office, has been granted anticipatory bail by means of an order dated 12.05.2022 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 3482 of 2022.

¶14

No officer or employee of the Post Office has been arrayed in the F.I.R. as an accused.

¶15

Having regard to the aforesaid facts and submissions and keeping in view the fact that there is no allegation that the applicant was an agent or employee/officer or agent of the Post Office; that no employee or officer of the Post Office has been arrayed as an accused and the allegation is that the money was deposited by the informants after going to the Post Office on its counter and also keeping in view the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶16

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

¶17

Let the applicant Ravindra Kumar Srivastava Alias Jhablu be released on bail in Case Crime No. 0085 of 2022, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 411 IPC, Police Station Karvi, 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:-

¶18

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

¶19

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶20

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

¶21

(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 facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the

¶22

evidence.

¶23

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.

¶24

Order Date :- 9.11.2022 Jaswant

¶25

Digitally signed by JASWANT KUMAR Date: 2022.11.10 11:33:50 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ravindra Kumar Srivastava Alias Jhablu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra Kumar Srivastava Alias Jhablu 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suneel Kumar @ Sheela Vs State of U.P.

Mohd Azeem Vs State of U.P.

Akash @ Bamb Vs State of U.P.

Raja @ Ishteqar Vs State of U.P.

Kusumveer Singh Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others