Allowed

Atul Kumar Verma v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2024BAIL/654/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed. The Court noted that similar allegations had led to 61 FIRs against the applicant, in 43 of which bail was granted. Co-accused were also granted bail by coordinate benches. The charge sheet was filed, and presence could be secured via conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties on four conditions.

Atul Kumar Verma vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:5993

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 654 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Atul Kumar Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

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

¶7

This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Atul Kumar Verma for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 641 of 2022, under Sections 409, 420, 406, 504, 506 and 427 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Barabanki, during trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the 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.

¶9

It is further submitted that allegations against the applicant are to the tune that the Company namely Life Long Care Multi State Agro Cooperative Society Limited of which applicant is the Director and he had lured the informant and other 9 persons to deposit huge amount in that Company on the pretext that on the maturity certain amount shall be paid to them or a piece of land would be provided to them.

¶10

It is vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and averments as have been made in the F.I.R. as well as in the statement of prosecution witnesses may not be deemed truthful in view of the fact that the applicant was not at all related with the management of the aforesaid Company and attention of this Court has been drawn towards Annexure No.3 wherein Managing Committee of the Company has been placed and name of the applicant is not shown therein.

¶11

It is further submitted that even if the allegations as levelled by the informant and other persons shown aggrieved are taken

¶12

as truthful, it will emerge that applicant was working in the Company and was not associated with its management. It is also submitted that on the basis of identical allegations so far 61 First Information Reports have been lodged against the applicant and out of these 61 cases, in 43 of such cases, he has been granted bail by competent criminal courts.

¶13

It is also submitted that identically placed co-accused persons, namely, Sangam Verma, Sharad Kumar Verma, Gunjan Verma, Pramod Kumar @ Pramod Kumar Verma, Shashikant Chaurasiya, Shiva Patel, Lav Kush Singh, Rahul Rathaur and Arvind Kumar Singh have been granted bail by Coordinate Benches of this Court, vide orders dated 09.11.2023, 29.11.2023, 31.05.2023, 20.12.2022, 04.04.2023, 24.02.2023, 11.01.2023 and order dated 09.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Applications Nos. 13374 of 2023, 14034 of 2023, 14039 of 2023, 6953 of 2023, 14972 of 2022, 4135 of 2023, 1901 of 2023, 556 of 2023 and 286 of 2023, respectively. The applicant is in jail in this case since 21.07.2022, charge-sheet in this case has already been submitted and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail the applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶14

It is next submitted that all the charged offences against the applicant are triable by magistrate and it is undertaken that the applicant shall cooperate in the speedy trial and would not seek any adjournment when the prosecution witnesses would be in attendance and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail the applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶15

Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer of bail of the applicant on the ground that the applicant is not having any parity with other co-accused persons, who have been granted bail and criminal history of the applicant has not been explained correctly and having regard to the material/evidence available against the applicant, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶16

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that on the basis of identical allegations 61 first information reports have been lodged against the applicant. Out of 61 first information reports lodged so far against the applicant, in 43 of such cases, applicant has been granted bail by coordinate Benches of this Court. Nothing has been brought in the knowledge of this Court, which may suggest that any order, whereby facility of bail has been extended in favour of the applicant, has been challenged at any higher forum or has been cancelled by the same Bench. Identically placed co-accused person namely Sangam Verma @

¶17

Sangam Kumar Verma, who was the Director of the Company at the relevant point of time as well as other co-accused, namely, Sharad Kumar Verma, Gunjan Verma, Pramod Kumar @ Pramod Kumar Verma, Shashikant Chaurasiya, Shiva Patel, Lav Kush Singh, Rahul Rathaur and Arvind Kumar Singh have also been granted bail by Coordinate Benches of this Court. Charge-sheet in this case has already been filed. Applicant is in jail in this case since 21.07.2022. The presence of the applicant could be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions.

¶18

Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is thus allowed.

¶19

Let the accused/applicant- Atul Kumar Verma involved in above-mentioned case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each and every date fixed and will file an undertaking before the trial court that he will not seek any adjournment especially on the dates when the prosecution witnesses are in attendance and if due to any exigency the applicant is not able to produce himself before the trial court, he will instruct his counsel engaged at the trial court to do all including cross examination of the prosecution witnesses in order to culminate the trial at the earliest. The violation of this condition alone would be the sufficient ground for the trial court to cancel the facility of bail granted to the applicant by this Court.

¶21

(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶22

(iii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶23

(iv) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶24

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

¶25

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶26

Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the case.

¶27

Order Date :- 19.1.2024 Praveen

¶28

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

Atul Kumar Verma v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atul Kumar Verma v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Seema Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko.

Bajrang Bahadur Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Smt. Neelam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. and Another

Kavita Chaudharya Alias Kavita Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko and Another

Rajnath Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Smt. Mithlesh Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.