Allowed

Rai Anoop Prasad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Apr 2022BAIL/4350/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed a bail application filed by Rai Anoop Prasad, accused of cheating and conspiracy under IPC provisions. The Court noted his professional reputation and lack of evidence implicating him in the leak of confidential papers, granting bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount, subject to specific conditions.

Rai Anoop Prasad Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4350 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rai Anoop Prasad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Singh,Ashutosh Mishra,Rajiv Lochan Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application, the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 943 of 2021 at Police Station Surajpur District Gautam Budh Nagar under Sections 409, 420, 120B IPC. The applicant is in jail since 30.11.2021.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.5, Gautam Budh Nagar on 13.01.2022.

¶7

Shri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned Senior counsel assisted by Sri Amit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is a contractor in a company running in the name of R.S.M. FINSERV Ltd. The company has earned a reputation over the years in the field of publication of confidential examination papers. The applicant has adopted very strict security protocols in the publication of the examination papers. Business prudence alone requires the applicant to ensure full secrecy of the exam papers, since his business

¶8

thrives on a reputation of maintaining confidentiality of the examination papers. The leak happened after the sealed examination papers were delivered to the competent authorities of the Government. The applicant has not been linked to the principal offenders responsible for the leak, namely, Rahul Mishra, Roshan Patel and Santosh Chaurasia. There is no money trail or any other evidence which connects the applicant to the leak. The contract for publication of the examination paper was awarded to the applicant by the State Government. The State Government is liable to pay Rs.14 Crores to the applicant for accomplishing the aforesaid task successfully. The criminal proceedings have been instituted only to divert attention from the lackadaisical and even criminal conduct of State officials who alone were responsible for leak of the papers in league with the principal offenders.

¶9

Explaining the criminal history of the applicant, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant belongs to an economically weaker section of the society and has become an easy scapegoat for the police authorities who have falsely implicated him in a number of cases to burnish their credentials. The criminal cases do not

¶10

depict commission of any heinous crime by the applicant and have no bearing on the instant case. The applicant is not a flight risk and there is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶11

Shri I. P. Srivastava, learned AGA for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA does not contest the criminal history of the applicant as disclosed in the bail application.

¶12

I see merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶13

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

¶14

Let the applicant- Rai Anoop Prasad be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

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

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶17

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

¶18

(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 evidence.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 25.4.2022 Deepika

¶21

Digitally signed by DEEPIKA SINGH Date: 2022.04.29 14:10:34 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rai Anoop Prasad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rai Anoop Prasad 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

Sachin@ Khatola Vs State of U.P.

Chandan Bharati Vs State of U.P.

Sanavvar Vs State of U.P.

Nazir Hussain Vs State of U.P.

Videshi Ram Vs State of U.P.

Rashid @ Bantu Vs State of U.P.