Allowed

Suresh Chandra Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC8 Nov 2024/1654/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Suresh Chandra Gupta in a corruption cheating and forgery case. The applicant, a retired Managing Director, was accused of improperly processing and allowing the voluntary retirement benefits of a co-accused who had already retired.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on interim anticipatory bail, subject to filing a bail bond and sureties and complying with standard conditions of the bail order.

Suresh Chandra Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy… — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:73972

¶2

Court No. - 29

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1654 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Suresh Chandra Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rama Pati Shukla,Manish Pandey,Naveen Awasthi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

On 02.08.2024, after hearing learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State this court had passed the following order:-

¶7

"1. Heard Sri Rama Pati Shukla, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Jayant Singh Tomar, the learned Additional Government Advocate-I appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records.

¶8

2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.0010 of 2023, under Sections 201, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120B I.P.C. and 7/13(1)(a) read with Section 1-3(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 registered at Police Station- Vigilance Establishment, District- Lucknow.

¶9

3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of the F.I.R. lodged on 17.10.2023 against the four persons including the applicant alleging that the co-accused namely, Sri Anang Pal Panwar who was working as Manager in the Shreetorn India Ltd. had applied for voluntary retirement and the applicant, who was working as Managing Director of the Company at the relevant point of time had accepted the VRS application of co-accused. The said accused received benefit payable under the VRS Scheme but thereafter he again joined the services and it is alleged that he had claimed VRS benefits wrongly.

¶10

4. In the affidavit filed in support of the instant application, it has been stated that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that applicant has retired long ago and he has attained the age of 71 years. The applicant has participated in an enquiry being conducted by the U.P. Vigilance Establishment and has got his statement recorded. Copy of the same has been annexed in the instant anticipatory bail application. All the other co-accused persons have granted anticipatory bail.

¶11

5. Learned A.G.A. has opposes this application by stating that the applicant had the main role in commission of offence and he had accorded VRS to the co-accused persons. He prays for and is granted three weeks' time to file counter affidavit in the matter. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within a week thereafter.

¶12

6. List this matter in the week commencing 27.8.2024.

¶13

7. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be granted interim anticipatory bail in the matter.

¶14

8. Therefore, it is directed that in the event of arrest/appearance of applicant- Suresh Chandra Gupta before the learned Trial Court till the next date of listing, she shall be released on interim anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime on her furnishing personal bail bond and two solvent sureties to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court on the following conditions and subject to any other conditions that may be fixed by the Trial Court:-

¶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 the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and

¶19

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

¶20

Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State. The applicant has filed a rejoinder affidavit.

¶21

Learned A.G.A. did not point out any violation of the conditions of interim anticipatory bail committed by the applicant. Nothing has come to light which may persuade this court to take a view, other than the view taken at the time of granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶22

In view of above, the interim order dated 02.08.2024 is made absolute and the anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶23

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶24

Order Date :- 8.11.2024 -Amit K-

¶25

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Suresh Chandra Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Chandra Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ghanshyam and 3 Others vs Arvind and 15 Others

Inspector Singh Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Shivbhajan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Gaurav Singh (Named as Shubham Singh in Fir) vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Eti Tripathi Thru. Her Husband Taresh Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and 4 Others

Eti Tripathi Thru. Her Husband Taresh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and 4 Others