Dismissed

Mukut Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Aug 2024ABAIL/8074/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the applicant's petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. despite his status as the first informant, noting that funds were deposited into his account without justification and a charge sheet had been submitted taking cognizance of the offence.

What the court decided

AI extract

Mukut Singh Vs State of U.P. — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:132911

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8074 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mukut Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhay Pratap Singh,Sachin Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Abhay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Mukut Singh , seeking anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest in Case Crime No. 348 of 2022, (Session Trial No. 70 of 2024), State Vs. Suresh Chand and others), pending before the court of Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (P.C. Act), Special Court No.2, Meerut, under Section 120-B IPC and Section 7/8 Prevention of Corruption Act, registered at Police Station Dankaur, District Gautam Budh Nagar, till the pendency of trial.

¶8

The facts of the case are that a First Information Report was lodged on 27.09.2022 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 166, 167 IPC and Sections 3(1)(da), 3(2(va) of SC/ST Act against the applicant, Suresh Chand the Manager and Suresh Chand Sharma the Assistant Teacher of Dr. Rajendra Prasad Inter College, Bilaspur on the basis of an application moved under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. with the allegation that he is a person belonging to reserve class and is working as an officiating principal since 01.04.2021. The accused does not belong to the said caste. The Manager of the college Suresh Chand and Assistant Teacher Suresh Chand Sharma are working in the college. The Manager and the teacher have animosity with him due to his caste and also because of the reason that they are senior with him but still they are trying he may not become the principal. In the list of seniority at serial No. 2, 3 and 4 also persons of reserved class of Schedule Caste are working and as such due to the said reason, the accused persons are having animosity with him and are conspiring so that he may remove from his post. The work of making selected

¶9

persons join as teacher is of the Manager. In November, 2021 the Board appointed five teachers and for joining the Manager Suresh Chand demanded Rs. 2-2.5 lakhs from them and on refusal threatened them to not permit them to join the work. Subsequently, the five newly appointed teachers were made to pay Rs. 3.40 lakhs out of which the Manager Suresh Chand took Rs. 1 lakh cash and Rs. 1.40 lakh deposited in the account of Arvind Kumar a peon and without the knowledge of the informant by committing cheating and in order to falsely implicate him got Rs. 50,000/deposited in his account through two teachers namely Kumari Jyoti and Santosh Kumar. After the teachers joined the services and were paid first salary, the remaining amount was demanded by the accused which was refused by them and then the matter was reported and on coming to know of it the first informant opposed it and tried to get the money returned to the newly appointed teachers. In an attempt to do so the Manager and the Assistant Teacher returned the money on 03.05.2022 since the said persons were having enmity with him. They managed to get the informant suspended on 14.05.2022 and the charge was handed over to Assistant Teacher Suresh Chand Sharma. After suspension of the informant, the Manager and the Assistant Teacher prepared a forged papers with regards to the fact that Kumari Jyoti and Santosh Kumar had deposited the money in the account of principal on his saying and affidavit to the said effect was got prepared by them. A charge sheet was also served on the informant after which he gave a reply to it to the enquiry committee.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is the informant. It is further submitted that coaccused Suresh Chand Sharma has been granted interim anticipatory bail vide order dated 10.06.2024 passed by this Court in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 5149 of 2024 (Suresh Chand Sharma Vs. State of U.P.), copy of the order has been produced before the Court which is taken on record. It is submitted that the applicant is the informant who has been subsequently made as an accused in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant challenged the order dated 24.09.2022 terminating his services before this Court in a writ petition which was allowed, the impugned order was set aside and he was permitted to continue in service with the officiating principal during the pendency of the proposal before the Board. It is submitted that the named two accused persons in order to falsely implicate the applicant got money deposited from the selected teachers in his account and also procured affidavits falsely on the

¶11

ground that he had asked for money which has been deposited in his account. It is submitted that charge sheet in the matter has been submitted after investigation against Suresh Chand, Suresh Chand Sharma, Arvind Kumar, Anjali Rathi, Ram Sagar, Santosh Kumar, Seema Pal, Jyoti and Mukut Singh (the present applicant) in which charge sheet against the applicant has been submitted under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and the court concerned has taken cognizance upon the same and summoned the accused persons in the matter vide order dated 15.01.2024. It is submitted that the implication of the applicant is without any credible and legal evidence. It is submitted that co-accused Arvind Kumar has also been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 31.07.2024 passed in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 7396 of 2024 (Arvind Kumar Vs. State of U.P.), copy of the said order is annexed as annexure 8 to the affidavit. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 27 of the affidavit.

¶12

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶13

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that although the applicant is the first informant of the matter but the fact which is apparent is that he has received money from newly appointed teachers in his bank account. There is no justification for his receiving the said money and also there is no reasonable and justifiable explanation given by him regarding the same. The investigation has concluded and charge sheet has been submitted against him. Prima facie there is finding against him on which the court concerned has taken cognizance and summoned him. In so far as the argument and the pleadings are concerned, the same may be the defence of the applicant before the trial court.

¶14

In view of the same, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, no ground is made out to interfere in the matter, the same is dismissed .

¶15

Order Date :- 20.8.2024 M. ARIF

¶16

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶17

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mukut Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Mukut Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases