Allowed

Sanjeev Kumar Tripathi v. State of U.P. Addl Chief Secty. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Allahabad HC13 Nov 2024/2389/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On an appeal for anticipatory bail in a corruption case involving alleged misappropriation of funds for dustbin installation, the single judge granted bail, noting that similar co-accused were already protected and no recovery proceedings had been initiated.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant granted anticipatory bail on furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties subject to standard conditions.

Sanjeev Kumar Tripathi Vs State of U.P. Addl Chief Secty. Home… — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:75035

¶2

Court No. - 29

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2389 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Tripathi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Addl Chief Secty. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shashank Kumar,Prashant Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Prashant Shukla, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Abhishek Kumar Singh, the learned State Counsel and perused the records.

¶7

The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.12 of 2022, under Sections 409, 120B I.P.C., 13(1)(A) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, registered at Police Station Lucknow Vigilance, District Lucknow.

¶8

The accused was working as the Village Development Officer in Block Bharawan, District Hardoi. Allegation against him is that he had made excess payment for installation of dustbins and thus misappropriated the excess amount and caused loss to the Government Exchequer.

¶9

Learned counsel for the accused applicants submits that three firms were recommended by the District Panchayati Raj Officer for installation of dustbins. The applicant got the quotations from three firms and provided the contract to the firm with lowest quotation and got the dust bins installed. It is further submitted that the FIR has been registered against as many as 182 people in respect of 66 villages. No proceeding for recovery of any excess amount has been initiated against any of the applicant.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that several co-accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail by means of orders dated 23.06.2023, 31.07.2023 and 26.09.2023 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Applications U/S 438 Cr.P.C. Nos. 1430 of 2023, 1677 of 2023 & 2101 of 2023.

¶11

In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bailapplication, it has been contended that the applicant is innocent, and he has falsely been implicated in the present case and he has a criminal history of one case i.e. FIR lodged as FIR No.621 of 2021 under Sections 419 & 420 IPC registered at Police Station Atrauli, District Hardoi, in which the applicant had been granted bail.

¶12

The learned State Counsel has submitted that dustbins has been purchased at the rates higher than the market rates in violation of the settled norms without inviting any tender, which resulted in undue final loss having been caused to the public exchequer.

¶13

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the accused-applicant was Village Development Officers and it would be difficult for him to ignore the direction issued by the District Panchayat Raj Officers and that several similarly situated co-accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for granting anticipatory bail to the applicants

¶14

The anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed . In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicants before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing personal bond and

¶15

two solvent sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of S.H.O./Court concerned on the following conditions and subject to any other conditions that may be fixed by the Trial Court:

¶16

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

¶17

(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;

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶22

Order Date :- 13.11.2024 -Amit K-

¶23

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

Sanjeev Kumar Tripathi v. State of U.P. Addl Chief Secty. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjeev Kumar Tripathi v. State of U.P. Addl Chief Secty. Home Civil Sectt. Lko 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Raman Sahni vs State of U.P. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Azad Khan vs the State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko.

Gulfam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Neeraj Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Govt. of U.P. Lucknow

Deepu Rawat vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Manbodh @ Manoj and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Sectt. Lko and Another