Allowed

Ashok Kumar Upadhyay v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 Jan 2023BAIL/37926/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. arising from an anti-corruption case (Section 7 PC Act) involving demand of an illegal fee, this court granted bail to the applicant upon furnishing a bond and conditions without reviewing the merits of the prosecution case.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions of attendance and non-disturbance of trial.

Ashok Kumar Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 87

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37926 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Upadhyay Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Irfan Ali,Mohd. Kamar Shah Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

The present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking bail in FIR/Case Crime No.355 of 2022, under Section 7 Anti Corruption Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Azamgarh.

¶7

As per the prosecution case, the accused-applicant was posted as Area Lekhpal. The complainant, Mohammaduddin gave an application on 27.7.2022 in Vigilance Office, Gorakhpur alleging that his father had died on 12.7.2021. His father had left behind two sons, including the complainant. After the death of the father, the complainant had given an application before the Tehsildar, Tehsil Nizamabad, Distrcit Azamgarh for mutating the names of the brothers against the estate of their father. The complainant and his brother were served with the notice for recording their statements on 26.7.2020. The accused-applicant told the complainant that for mutating the names of the complainant and his brother, he would have to pay Rs.5,000/-, on which the complainant asked him whether Rs.5,000/- was a Government fees, then the accused-applicant told the complainant that it was the convenience fee and unless R.5,000/- was paid to him, he would not mutate the names of the complainant and his brother on the land of his father. On this complaint, a trap team was constituted and the accused-applicant was apprehended while

¶8

demanding and accepting Rs.5,000/-, which was recovered from him.

¶9

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the accused-applicant has been in jail since 28.7.2022. There is no other criminal offence registered against him. He further submits that the accused-applicant will cooperate in the trial and will not tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses.

¶10

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but not disputed the aforesaid facts.

¶11

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.

¶12

Let applicant Ashok Kumar Upadhyay 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 :-

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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 sufficient 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.

¶17

Order Date :- 30.1.2023

¶18

Rao/-

¶19

Digitally signed by :- CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ashok Kumar Upadhyay v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar Upadhyay 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

Ashwani Kumar Srivastava Vs State of U.P.

Vipin Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Raj Narain Misra Vs State of U.P.

Upendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sahban @ Jiyaji Yadav @ Saheb Vs State of U.P.