Arvind Kumar Nahar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:2221

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 33 of 2024

Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Nahar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv S.E. Chitambar 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 including up-to-date case diary and the investigation against the applicant is still pending.

¶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- Arvind Kumar Nahar in Case Crime No. 431 of 2022, under Sections 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Mahoba, 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 has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.

¶10

It is further submitted that the applicant at the relevant point of time was Junior Engineer and was entrusted with the work of supervising construction work amongst others of the Gram Panchayat- Kargharakala, Kabrai, Mahoba also and the allegations are to the tune that he has prepared M.B. of the works which were not executed on the spot and thereby, in connivance with the other accused persons, have misappropriated a large amount of government funds.

¶11

Highlighting the above facts, it is vehemently submitted that the FIR of this case appears to have been lodged on the basis of an inquiry report conducted by an inquiry committee comprising of Assistant Engineer, PWD, Mahoba and Zila Panchayat Adhikari, Mahoba and after a thorough inquiry against the applicant and Village Pradhan of the Gram Sabha,

¶12

the applicant has not been found guilty and the inquiry has not concluded that misappropriation has been done by the applicant.

¶13

It is further submitted that when two higher officials/officers of the district conversant with the nature of the work have thoroughly inquired the allegations, there was no logic for any other officer posted in the district to have recommended for lodging of an FIR against the applicant as the applicant was not at all instrumental in making payment or drawing cheques and the same was the job of Village Pradhan and Panchayat Secretary.

¶14

It is also submitted that as the investigation is pending, he would cooperate in the investigation and would remain present before the investigating officer as and when his presence would be required and in case of submission of charge sheet he would also cooperate in the trial.

¶15

It is further submitted that applicant is a respectable citizen of the locality and is having no criminal history. The investigating officer without there being any cogent and reliable material/evidence is making all out efforts to apprehend/arrest the applicant and there is no apprehension that after being granted facility of anticipatory bail, applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty. He undertakes that he is ready to cooperate in the investigation as well as in the trial as and when required and thus, protection from arrest be granted to him.

¶16

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that it was after thorough inquiry conducted by the authorities concerned, the FIR has been lodged in this case and the same is pertaining to the misappropriation of public money and the applicant being the Junior Engineer of the Gram Sabha is accused of making false M.B., on the basis of which the payment has been done. Thus, the applicant is not entitled for any protection.

¶17

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that however, on the basis of an inquiry report allegedly prepared by the Assistant Engineer, PWD, Mahoba and Zila Panchayat Adhikari, Mahoba, the applicant was not found delinquent therein. The Pradhan of the village namely, Pancham Singh against whom the inquiry report has concluded to be involved in the misappropriation of money, has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 14.3.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 618 of 2023.

¶18

Thus having regard to the reasons mentioned above and keeping in view 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 , in the considered opinion of this court, having regard to the material/evidence available against the applicant, the applicant may be provided protection from arrest for a limited period of time.

¶19

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. before the competent court in the event of arrest of the applicant- Arvind Kumar Nahar, involved in aforesaid case crime number 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:-

¶20

(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.

¶21

(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;

¶22

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

¶23

Order Date :- 9.1.2024 Shravan

¶24

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

Arvind Kumar Nahar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind Kumar Nahar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rohit Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Babu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Add. Chief Secy. Home Govt. Lko.

Paragi Lal Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Applicant a (Minor) Thru. His Mother/Natural Guardian B vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Angad Nishad vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lucknow

State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. vs Alok Verma and Another