Allowed¶15

Ajit Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2023ABAIL/1363/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court anticipatory bail Section 438 CrPC Ajit Kumar Yadav State of U.P. Case Crime 236 of 2022 IPC 419 420 467 468 471 forged certificate assistant teacher appointment 2010 Raunapur Azamgarh personal bond Rs. 50,000 two sureties Manju Rani Chauhan order dated 7.2.2023

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in Case Crime No. 236 of 2022, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, till submission of the report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. by the investigating officer, subject to the conditions imposed in the order. ¶15

Ajit Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with Case Crime No. 236 of 2022 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Raunapur, District Azamgarh, pending investigation.

¶13

Court's answer

After close scrutiny of Section 438 Cr.P.C. and its relevant clauses, the Court is satisfied that the applicant has made out a case for anticipatory bail in connection with the aforesaid case crime pending investigation, and the anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

In the event of arrest in the aforesaid case crime, the applicant is to be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, till submission of the report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. by the investigating officer, subject to conditions: availability for interrogation, no inducement/threat/promise to any person acquainted with the facts, and no leaving India without previous permission with deposit of passport before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶15

Key takeaways

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law, independently and without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court.ratio¶21
If the applicant breaches or attempts to breach the conditions, wilfully violates them, or abstains from investigation, it is open to the Investigating Officer or the concerned authority to apply before the court of Session for cancellation of the interim protection.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail - S.438 Cr.P.C. - Applicant named in F.I.R. in Case Crime No. 236 of 2022, Ss.419/420/467/468/471 I.P.C., P.S. Raunapur, Dist. Azamgarh, alleging that he obtained appointment as Assistant Teacher in 2010 on the basis of a forged certificate; earlier anticipatory bail application rejected by the court of sessions on 19.01.2023; no criminal antecedents attributed to applicant; Court satisfied that a case for anticipatory bail was made out and allowed the application - release on arrest on personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount till report under S.173(2) Cr.P.C., with conditions (availability for interrogation, no inducement/threat, no departure from India without permission, deposit of passport); investigation to be concluded independently and expeditiously; breach of conditions open to cancellation of interim protection by the Court of Session.

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1363 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Ajit Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Ajeet Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A and perused the record.

¶6

The instant application is being moved by the applicant- Ajit Kumar Yadav that he has every reason to believe that he may be arrested in connection with Case Crime no.236 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police StationRaunapur, District-Azamgarh.

¶7

From the record, it is evident that the applicant has approached this Court after getting his anticipatory bail rejected from the court of sessions vide order dated 19.01.2023.

¶8

Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P., hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A. as per Section 438(3) Cr.P.C. (U.P. Amendment) is not required.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is named in F.I.R. and the F.I.R. was lodged by the informant leveling the allegation that applicant on the basis of forged certificate has obtained appointment as an Assistant Teacher in 2010 in District Azamgarh.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Learned counsel for the applicant has strenuously advanced a number of arguments demonstrating falsity of accusation levelled by the informant in first information report

¶11

to besmirch reputation of the applicant and belittle him in the public estimate. He contended that the applicant has no criminal antecedent to his credit and never undergone any imprisonment after conviction by any court of law in relation to any cognizable offence previously. An assurance was also advanced on behalf of the applicant that he would render all requisite cooperation and assistance in the process of law and with the investigating agency and shall not create any hindrance to reach to its logical conclusion and shall not flee away from the course of justice.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application by mentioning that though the applicant has got no criminal antecedents but there is nothing on record to satisfy that the police personnel are after the applicant to arrest him. He further submits that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made in the F.I.R., the applicant is not entitled for any relaxation from this Court.

¶13

After the close scrutiny of Section 438 Cr.P.C. and its relevant clauses, the Court is satisfied that the applicant has made out a case for anticipatory bail in connection with aforesaid case crime pending investigation.

¶14

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶15

Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may be adversely affect the investigation and subsequent stage of the case, the Court directs that in the event of arrest of the applicant in aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer till the submission of report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. by the investigating officer , with the conditions that :

¶16

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

¶17

(ii) 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 office;

¶18

(iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶19

(iv) The Investigating Officer of the case would make all

¶20

necessary endeavour to gear up the investigation in utmost transparent way and would try to conclude it expeditiously.

¶21

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law, independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶22

In the event, the applicant breach or attempt to breach any of the aforesaid conditions or wilfully violate above conditions or abstains himself from the investigation, it would be open for the Investigating Officer or the concerned authority to apply before the court of Session for cancellation of interim protection and the Court of Session has every liberty and freedom to revoke the anticipatory bail after recording the reasons for the same.

¶23

Order Date :- 7.2.2023

¶24

Rahul.

¶25

Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ajit Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajit Kumar Yadav 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

Virendra Pratap Shahi @ Virendra Shahi Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Aarif Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Karan Vs State of U.P.

Anisha Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another