Allowed

Adarsh Srivastava @ Rahul v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Allahabad HC10 Sept 2024BAIL/5738/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application by an outsourced bank employee charged with forgery and cheating offences relating to a depositor's missing Rs. 95,000. Court noted absence of CCTV evidence and cashier already bailed, and released the applicant on bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond with two reliable sureties, subject to conditions including attendance at trial and no witness tampering.

Adarsh Srivastava @ Rahul vs State of U.P. Thru… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:62950

¶2

Court No. - 8

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5738 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Adarsh Srivastava @ Rahul Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Girdhari Lal Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J .

¶6

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

¶7

The instant application has been moved seeking bail in respect of Case Crime No. 218 of 2023, under Sections 409,420,467,468,471,120B,34 I.P.C., Police Station Harraiya, District Balrampur, during trial.

¶8

The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that he has been falsely implicated. The allegations as per the First Information Report is that the complainant has a saving bank account in Indian Bank, Harraiya Branch. It is alleged that on 11.07.2023, a sum of Rs. 95,000/- was deposited with the Bank of which he was issued a receipt and a corresponding deposit was also recorded in his passbook. It is further alleged that after about 2 months when he had gone to the Bank, it revealed that there was no amount of Rs. 95,000/- in the account and it is in this context, the FIR was lodged.

¶9

It is further alleged that the name of the applicant also surfaced as a number of other depositors is also said to have handed over the money to the applicant.

¶10

It is stated that the applicant is not an employee of the Bank and he is an employee of Integra Micro System Ltd. who provides man power to the Bank and though the applicant is working for last 7 years but there has been no complaint.

¶11

It is further submitted that in so far as the present averments made in the First Information Report is concerned, they do not relate to the applicant and on the basis of statements made by the other persons including the ones that had been brought on record along with the counter affidavit, it is alleged that the applicant was present in the Bank with other employees and

¶12

used to receive money. It is further stated that the aforesaid averments are quite unnatural and even if the applicant is in the Bank as an outsourced employee, the responsibility of all the cash transactions if is of the cashier. The Cashier of the Bank has already been enlarged on bail and only to implicate the applicant the instant FIR and several other complaints have been made.

¶13

The learned A.G.A. submits that the investigations reveal that several persons have given money to the present applicant and there are certain documents to indicate that it is the applicant who is returning some money and for the aforesaid reasons as indicated in the counter affidavit, the applicant has complicity in the offence.

¶14

Having considered the aforesaid submissions and from the perusal of the material on record, apparently, it is a case of financial transactions, in case if the applicant is said to have been an outsourced employee of the Bank and was with the cashier, the same could easily be ascertained by looking into the CCTV footage but there is nothing in this context brought on record uptil now nor any such evidence has been collected.

¶15

The learned A.G.A. could not dispute that the cashier of the aforesaid bank has already been enlarged on and in the instant FIR there is a clear averment regarding the money being deposited with the bank. Nothing has been further brought on record in shape of counter affidavit as to the basic fact that the complainant had deposited Rs. 95,000/- and given to the applicant that the money was deposited into the bank for which he received a receipt and it was duly reflected in the pass-book and even this fact has not been verified. The charge sheet in the matter has already been filed and the applicant is in Jail since 29.03.2024.

¶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- Adarsh Srivastava @ Rahul 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 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.

¶23

(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.

¶24

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

¶25

O rder Date :- 10.9.2024 Asheesh

¶26

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

Adarsh Srivastava @ Rahul v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adarsh Srivastava @ Rahul v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pannalal Vs Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil Kadipur, Sultanpur and Others

Ram Manoratha Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Deptt. of Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Smt. Ranjana Devi Vs Tahsildar, Tahsil Kunda, Pratapgarh and Others

Palak Jain vs Praful Kumar Jain

Jiya Ram Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko. and 15 Others

Aman Deep Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue,Lko. and 3 Others