Allowed

Avanish Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 May 2023ABAIL/898/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to an applicant accused of embezzlement under Section 409 IPC, relying on Supreme Court precedents. The order includes conditions for cooperation and non-interference with the trial process.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on personal bond with two sureties subject to specific conditions regarding interrogation, non-interference, and appearance.

Avanish Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:100992

¶2

Court No. - 83

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 898 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Avanish Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- V.K. Agnihotri,Saiful Islam Siddiqui,Syed Safdar Ali Kazmi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Syed Safdar Ali Kazmi, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Nitin Kesarwani, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

¶7

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 478 of 2021, under Section 409 of IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Etawah, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the applicant is the Conductor in the bus of U.P.S.R.T.C. and is stated to have purged the record and embezzled an amount of Rs.1,07,910/- and thereby had caused the loss to the State Exchequer.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and has apprehension of his arrest. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has further stated that the FSL report does not indicate any use of chemical in it. It only indicates that there is some overlapping in the record. There is every possibility of the use of carbon paper and due to that reason, the said overlapping might have caused. There is nothing on record to suggest that the applicant has committed the said offence.

¶10

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. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶11

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶12

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of " Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 ", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶13

Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶14

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Avanish Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-

¶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 previous permission of the court;

¶18

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

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

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 based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶22

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶23

Order Date :- 10.5.2023 Siddhant

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Avanish Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avanish Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Durgesh @ Naga Vs State of U.P.

Irfan Vs State of U.P.

Sher Ali Vs State of U.P.

Sri Niwas and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Mukul Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sher Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.