Allowed

Dharmendra Tyagi and 3 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2023ABAIL/229/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court issued anticipatory bail to four applicants accused of manipulating ration shop databases under sections related to forgery and IT laws. The court held that a case for bail was made out and granted release conditioned on furnishing bonds, non-interference with investigation, and appearance before the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail with personal bond and two sureties each, subject to conditions of availability for interrogation, no tampering, and court appearance.

Dharmendra Tyagi and 3 Others Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 85

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 229 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Dharmendra Tyagi And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vishal Tandon Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Vishal Tandon, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri O.P. Mishra, learned AGA for the State and perused the papers on record.

¶6

This application has been moved on behalf of the applicants- Dharmendra Tyagi, Sunny, Yograj and Satish Kumar seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.1003 of 2018, under Sections- 420, 465, 468, 470, 471 I.P.C. and Sections- 3/7 Essential Commodities Act and Section- 66D I.T. (Amendment) Act, 2000 and Section- 34 of Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Muzaffarnagar.

¶7

As per prosecution case, the present applicants who were licence holders for running fair price shop had edited the adhar numbers of the beneficiaries to usurp the articles and to give the benefit to others. It is alleged in the F.I.R,. that they manipulated database in a well planned manner for black-marketing of ration.

¶8

It is contended on behalf of the applicants that it is not possible for licensed shop owners to manipulate the database in the E-pos machine unless they possess a very good technical expertise. It is further contended that the function of E-pos machine involves only putting thumb impression and details of the quantity of ration, related things and the quantity of ration to be distributed to the persons entitled is displayed. It is also submitted that they are named in the F.I.R. by the superior officers just to save themselves from prosecution/enquiry.

¶9

It is brought to my notice that the applicants' arrest was stayed by order dated 29.03.2019 in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition no.7765 of 2019. It is further argued that the applicants are innocent and have no criminal antecedents and shall abide by conditions imposed by this Court.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶11

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 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 applicants Dharmendra Tyagi, Sunny, Yograj and Satish Kumar 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 applicants shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶15

(ii) that the applicants 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 applicants shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

(vi) that the applicants 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 applicants.

¶21

10. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicants 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 :- 22.2.2023 Asha

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ASHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dharmendra Tyagi and 3 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmendra Tyagi and 3 Others 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

Ramsunder Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Kiran and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jaswant Vs State of U.P and Another

Anuj Kumar @ Golu @ Piyush Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.