Allowed

Chandan Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Jan 2023ABAIL/13264/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous Application under Section 438 CrPC filed by Chandan Kumar Gupta seeking anticipatory bail in an Essential Commodities Act case involving ration distribution manipulation. The court examined the prosecution case, witness statements, and technical feasibility of allegations, concluding that a case for bail is made out.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding appearance, non-interference, and non-fleeing.

Chandan Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 85

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13264 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Chandan Kumar Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amrit Raj Chaurasiya,Devesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Devesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Chhavi Pal Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 0448 of 2018, under Sections 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act, Police Station Bhelupur, District Varanasi.

¶7

As per prosecution case, an FIR was registered by the Supply Inspector alleging that the applicant and several other P.D.S. shop holders by manipulating the database, aadhar authentication which is done through the E-Pos machine, distributed the rations to persons not entitled for the same and on that his P.D.S. shop was raided and the stock was verified and it was found that certain quantity of the P.D.S. grains mismatched with the stock register. On the basis of this FIR, investigation was conducted and after sanction of the District Magistrate, a challani report was filed.

¶8

It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the facts as alleged in the FIR itself show that all the beneficiaries gave a statement in favour of the applicant that they duly received the ration for the month in question; it is contended that the statement of seven beneficiaries were recorded and they did not alledge anything against the applicant and instead they stated that they duly received the ration; it is further contended that after verification of stock, 3.24 quintals of wheat and 2.16 quintals of rice was found less in the stock which was explained by the applicant that the shop manager/owner put remaining stock at some other place for lack of sufficient space in that shop; on the basis of those statements and facts, the investigating officer prepared a F.R. for closing the case, however, when applying for sanction, the District Magistrate without considering the facts and circumstances of the case directed the investigating officer to file a chargesheet; it is further argued that once certain data is fed in E-Pos machine, it is not possible for any non-technical person to manipulate the same and change the aadhar numbers; the applicant is not so technically proficient so that he could manipulate the bio-metrical authentication mechanism.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail, however, the facts aforesaid could not be countered.

¶10

It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against

¶11

the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶12

In the instant case, I considered submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, In my view, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. Hence, the present anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant, Chandan Kumar Gupta involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each of the same amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the conditions as below:-

¶14

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶15

(ii) that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any 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 or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶16

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶17

(iv) that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶18

(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶19

(vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted.

¶20

9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶21

10. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion at any stage of the case based on material before him.

¶22

Order Date :- 10.1.2023 #Vikram/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chandan Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandan Kumar Gupta 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sakir Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Devendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mahendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kamal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Firoz Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Arbaz Vs State of U.P. and Another