Allowed

Avadhesh Dubey v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC25 Aug 2023ABAIL/8295/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail to an applicant falsely implicated in a cheating and criminal conspiracy case involving university officials, allowing release on conditions including cooperation with investigation and appearing in court.

What did the court decide?

Released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of cooperation and appearance.

Avadhesh Dubey Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:172183

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8295 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Avadhesh Dubey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Daga,Akhilesh Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Abhishek Kumar Jaiswal, Advocate holding brief of Sri Amit Daga, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.491 of 2020, registered under Sections 420, 120-B I.P.C. at Police StationKotwali Nagar, District- Ayodhya with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶9

As per prosecution story, the Examination Controller and Incharge Registrar A.M. Ansari alongwith Professor G.C.R. Jaiswal, the then Vice-Chancellor of University, in collusion with one unknown person are stated to have usurped an amount in lakhs of rupees of the State Exchequer by committing interpolation in the logbook of vehicle used during the course of official duty.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant is not named in the FIR and his name has come up later on, on the basis that he is the proprietor of the travel agency which is stated to have provided the vehicle to the said officials. Learned counsel has stated that the applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. The applicant as a bona fide person has provided the vehicle and issued bills for the same. The applicant has only been paid Rs.35,000/- of the amount which is due towards the University. Learned counsel has stated that the case of the applicant is at different footing to named accused persons. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The

¶11

applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel has stated that the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1" . The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶14

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Avadhesh Dubey be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶15

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

¶16

(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;

¶17

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

¶18

(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶22

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.

¶23

Order Date :- 25.8.2023/ Vikas

¶24

[Krishan Pahal, J.]

¶25

Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Avadhesh Dubey v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avadhesh Dubey v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Smt. Gitiya @ Sangeeta Vs State of U.P.

S.M. Tariq Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Nazim Vs State of U.P.

Ram Nandan @ Ram Nandan Chaudhary and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Indradev Shukla Vs State of U.P. and Another