Allowed

Vimal Kumar Sonkar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko.

Allahabad HC23 Jul 2024ABAIL/475/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court converted interim anticipatory bail into regular bail for Vimal Kumar Sonkar in a corruption case, citing parity with co-accusees and the *Sushila Aggarwal* dictum.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted; ordered to surrender on summons and released on personal bond with two sureties subject to standard conditions of cooperation and appearance.

Vimal Kumar Sonkar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:49590

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 475 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vimal Kumar Sonkar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Purnendu Chakravarty Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.01/2014, under Sections 409/120-B I.P.C. and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, P.S. Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶9

This Court while granting interim protection vide order dated 01.07.2024 has passed the following order:-

¶10

"The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.01/2014, under Sections 409/120-B I.P.C. and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, P.S. Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was posted as Superintendent Engineer, LDA at the time of alleged incident. Applicant is still in service at some other place. Since the registration of first information report, more than ten years

¶13

has been passed. He submits that applicant has cooperated in the investigation.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant further invited the attention of the court towards the orders of 54 co-accused persons who have been granted anticipatory bail in this case. He has also drawn attention of the court towards similarly situated officers of the LDA namely, Mahendra Singh Gurditta and Rakesh Kumar Shukla who have been granted anticipatory bail by the Co-ordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 01.03.2024 and 27.04.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.421 of 2024 and 321 of 2024 respectively. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial.

¶15

Learned Addl. Government Advocate submits that charge sheet has been filed in this case. He prays for and is allowed three weeks' time to file counter affidavit however, he does not dispute that role of Mahendra Singh Gurditta and Rakesh Kumar Shukla (supra) is akin to that of present applicant. List on 23.07.2024.

¶16

On due consideration to the argument advanced as well as perusal of the record and the bail orders of Mahendra Singh Gurditta and Rakesh Kumar Shukla (supra), role of present applicant is similar to that of aforesaid two persons, undertaking given by the applicant and also considering the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶17

Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant-Vimal Kumar Sonkar shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the

¶18

like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶19

(1) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial and he will not influence the witnesses.

¶20

(2) The accused-applicant will remain present on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶21

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

¶22

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that 54 persons/coaccused in this crime number have been granted anticipatory bail including one Siddharth whose anticipatory bail has been granted by the Supreme Court vide order dated 16.08.2021, the details of accused persons as well as bail orders have been given in paragraph 10 of the bail application, he seeks parity. Charge-sheet in the matter has been filed. Applicant has cooperated in the investigation and further undertakes to cooperate in the trial. He has no criminal antecedent.

¶23

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application and has submitted that there is no parity with the bail order of Siddharth whose bail has been granted by the Supreme Court vide order dated 16.08.2021. He further submits that chargesheet in the matter has been filed.

¶24

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that his exact parity comes out from the bail orders of Rakesh Kumar Shukla and Mahendra Singh Gurditta whose anticipatory bail applications have been allowed by the Co-ordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 27.04.2024 & 01.03.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.321 of 2024 & 421 of 2024 respectively. He submits that case of the applicant is akin to these two persons. Learned A.G.A. could not dispute this fact.

¶25

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record so also the fact that charge-sheet in the matter has been filed, applicant has no criminal history, he has cooperated in the investigation and he shall cooperate in the trial, the interim protection granted by this Court vide order dated 01.07.2024 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.

¶26

In view of the above, since, charge-sheet in the matter has been filed, the accused applicant- Vimal Kumar Sonkar is directed to surrender before trial court, if he is summoned to face trial for offence in question. The accused applicant shall be released on bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶27

(i) 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 tamper with the evidence;

¶28

(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶29

(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶30

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

¶31

(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

¶32

Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.

¶33

It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶34

In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed.

¶35

Order Date :- 23.7.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶36

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

Vimal Kumar Sonkar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vimal Kumar Sonkar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko.

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

Rajendra Harijan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Deptt. of Home and 3 Others

Dr. Birendra Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Atul Kulshreshtha Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Juvenile Delinquents a in Crime No. 35/2024 vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Somu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

Tejpal Alias T.P. Kaushik vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Vocational Education and Skill Development Deptt. Lko. and Another