Allowed

Raja Ram Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Sept 2024ABAIL/2206/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. allowed. The applicant, accused of financial irregularities in Panchayat Bhawan construction, was granted bail pending police report on furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000 with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Granted liberty on anticipatory bail subject to personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties and conditions.

Raja Ram Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:66641

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2206 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Raja Ram Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Praveen Tripathi,Sudha Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Learned AGA informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present application has been moved by the accusedapplicant- Raja Ram Yadav in Case Crime No. 255 of 2023, under Section 409 I.P.C., Police Station Umri Begumganj, District Gonda, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant while pressing the anticipatory bail application submits that the applicant at the relevant point of time was employed as Gram Rojgar Sewak and was attached at the Gram Sabha concerned and the FIR of this case has been lodged against the applicant and another coaccused persons pertaining to certain financial irregularities found in the construction of a Panchayat Bhawan apparently on the basis of an enquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Committee comprising of Executive Engineer and Project Manager of Rural Engineering Services.

¶10

It is further submitted that certain irregularities have been found pertaining to the construction of Panchayat Bhawan specifically with regard to the depth of the foundation of the building and also noticing that certain cracks have developed on the walls of the building and also that the building was not completed.

¶11

Highlighting the above facts, it is vehemently submitted that the applicant was merely the Gram Rojgar Sewak and was not at all connected with the monitoring of the construction work nor is qualified to assess the same as the same could only be

¶12

assessed by the Engineer and by other relevant Authorities as the construction was being done under the supervision of the Engineer.

¶13

It is further submitted that the applicant was also not entrusted for making any payment to any person and simply his signature has been found anywhere the same would not colour him as an accused while he was not having any authority to pay anything as the payment pertaining to any work done under any Gram Sabha is to be made under the joint signatures of the Pradhan and Panchayat Secretary, therefore the Enquiry Committee has committed illegality in also of holding the applicant responsible for poor construction work of the Panchayat Bhawan.

¶14

It is further submitted that the applicant is respectable citizen of the locality and he is cooperating in the investigation and further undertakes that he will remain present before the Investigating Officer as and when his presence would be required.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that having regard to the irregularity committed by the applicant in the construction of Panchayat Bhawan, he is not entitled for any protection.

¶16

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record and keeping in view the inquiry report submitted by the inquiry committee comprising of two officers and also having an eye that a technical assistant was also deputed to supervise the construction of the Panchayat Bhawan, in the considered opinion of this Court, liberty of the applicant in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors., MANU/SC/1021/2010, Sushila Aggarwal and Ors. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and Ors., MANU/SC/0100/2020, Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Ors. v. State of Punjab , MANU/SC/0215/1980 : 1980 (2) SCC 565, and Nathu Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others :(2021) 6 SCC 64, may be protected.

¶17

It is further submitted that similarly situated persons the Pradhan of the Gram Sabha, namely, Satya Prakash Mishra as well as Gram Vikas Adhikari / Panchayat Secretary, namely, Narendra Kumar Soni have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, vide orders dated 09.01.20924 and 01.03.2024 passed in CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. Nos. - 3099 of 2023 and 449 of 2024, respectively.

¶18

Thus, the instant anticipatory bail application is finally disposed of in terms that till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. (193 of the Code of Bharitya Nagrik Surkasha Sanhita) before the competent court in the event of arrest of the applicant- Raja Ram Yadav involved in aforesaid case crime number, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned/Investigating Officer concerned with the following conditions:-

¶19

(1) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation or for discovery of any fact by a police officer/investigating officer as and when required and will cooperate in the investigation.

¶20

(2) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶21

(3) The applicant shall not leave the India without the previous permission of the Court.

¶22

Order Date :- 25.9.2024 Muk

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Raja Ram Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raja Ram Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Chandra Kumari Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mumtaj Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and Another

Pavan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Mohd. Sahbaj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Umesh Lonia Thru. His Mamiya Sasur (Father-in-Law) Sumer Chndra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 5 Others

Suresh Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others