In a criminal bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the Allahabad High Court released the applicant, a government employee charged under the Prevention of Corruption Act, on personal bond and sureties without delving into the merits.
Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 87
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14727 of 2022
Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Vashisth,Shyam Sunder Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Suneel Kumar Vashisth, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ratnendu Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. of 113 of 2022, under Sections 13 of Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Pilibhit .
The accused-applicant is a Junior Engineer in U.P. Public Works Department in Pilibhit. The complainant was in flying squad for Election of 2022 of U.P. Legislative Assembly and he was given the charge of Incharge Magistrate area 127, Pilibhit. On 5th February, 2022 at around 7.30 p.m. complainant received a call from an unknown person saying that a large amount was collected in the house of the accused-applicant for assisting a candidate and said amount was to be delivered to the said candidate contesting election for Member of Legislative Assembly. The complainant along with his team visited the house of the accusedapplicant and recovered 40,99,300/- from his house. Since the accused-applicant could not furnish particulars of the amount recovered from his house, and its source, the said amount was ceased and the FIR in question came to be registered.
Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the accused-applicant was the treasurer of Diploma Engineer Sangh, Bareily and, it was a contribution of the members Sangh which was kept in the house of the applicant. He further submits that the District Presidents and Secretaries of the Zone of Diploma Engineer Sangh have clarified this fact that the said amount
was from the contribution of members of the Diploma Engineers Sangh and some amount was of his brother-in-law. He has further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed. The accused-applicant is in jail since 7.2.2021 and there is no criminal anticident of the accusedapplicant.
The accused-applicant is a government-employee and there is no chance for him to temper with the evidence or influence the outcome of the trial. It is further submitted that if the accused-applicant is enlarged on bail he will cooperate with the trial for its early conclusion.
Sri Ratnendu Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application but has not disputed the fact that the accused-applicant is in jail since 7.2.2022 and there is no other criminal anticident except for the present case.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but not disputed the aforesaid facts.
Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, coupled with the contentions raised by the learned counsel for both sides, and without entering into the merit of the case, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant Mukesh Kumar be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the
Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
[Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.]
Order Date :- 6.1.2023
Kumar Manish.
Digitally signed by :- MANISH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a corruption case pending trial.
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Mukesh Kumar
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
