Umesh Kumar Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:31849

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4487 of 2024

Applicant :- Umesh Kumar Srivastava Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Home Civil Sectt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Prabhakar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶8

The instant application has been moved seeking bail in respect of Case Crime No.0009 of 2024, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Rewsa, District Sitapur during trial.

¶9

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case.

¶10

It is submitted that the FIR has been lodged by the complainant alleging therein that the incident is said to have occurred on 9.7.2022. It is alleged therein that in order to facilitate the grant of licence for installation of petrol pump, the co-accused Dheeraj Saxena is said to have received money as illegal gratification from the complainant.

¶11

It is further submitted that the averments contained in the FIR are at variance with the statement of the complainant recorded under Section 161 CrPC. It is further submitted that the statements of the alleged witnesses are also contrary to the statement of the complainant as well as the version contained in the FIR which causes doubt over the alleged occurrence.

¶12

It is further urged that the co-accused Dheeraj Saxena in whose account, the amount was transferred has already been enlarged on bail by means of the order dated 09.04.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application no.3910 of 2024.

¶13

It is also urged that the applicant has no criminal history and

¶14

has been in jail since 10.01.2024. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶16

Considering the rival submissions as well as the facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record also considering the nature of allegations and accusation against the applicant, the severity of the punishment if convicted and the period of incarceration as well as the fact that no apprehension has been expressed by the learned AGA that the applicant is at the risk of fleeing justice or that he would tamper with evidence or influence any witness, hence, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶17

Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶18

Let the applicant- Umesh Kumar Srivastava involved in the above-mentioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. At the time of executing required sureties, the following conditions shall be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

(iii) 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.

¶22

(iv) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section

¶23

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.

¶24

(v) 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.

¶25

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶26

[Jaspreet Singh,J.]

¶27

Order Date :- 24.4.2024 Harshita

¶28

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

Umesh Kumar Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh Kumar Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shyamji Mishra Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Department Civil Secretariate Lucknow

Rohit Mandal Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Pappu Kumar Gupta Vs Union of India Thru. Inspector Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Office Lko.

Pramod Kumar @ Pramod Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Udhaw Singh vs Enforcement Directorate Thru. Assistant Director, Lko.

Ashfaq Ahmad and Others vs Deputy Director Consolidation, Sultanpur and Others