Allowed

Avnish Singh @ Avinash v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Allahabad HC23 Aug 2024BAIL/9044/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the High Court allowed the applicant's bail despite recovery of bribe money during a trap, finding no material to show demand was made and noting the applicant's clean history before imposing standard bond conditions.

What did the court decide?

Directed release of applicant on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence or witnesses.

Avnish Singh @ Avinash vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:57781

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9044 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Avnish Singh @ Avinash Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Pratap Singh,Akhil Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.08 of 2024, under Sections 7 and 12 Prevention of Corruption Act, P.S. Anti Corruption, District Lucknow.

¶8

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that applicant has caught red handed by the trap team and bribe money of Rs.15,00/- has been recovered from his possession. It is further alleged that both the applicant and the complainant were talking frequently.

¶9

Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated. Applicant is working on contract basis in U.P. Power Corporation since 2016. Applicant has unblemished career. Applicant has no authority with respect to sanctioning or processing the installation of tubewell. The main allegations against Junior Engineer who has not been arrested. The complainant is a journalist as adverse report has been submitted by the concerned Junior Engineer against him therefore, he developed a grudge and falsely implicate the applicant.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer and has submitted

¶11

that in the pre trap inquiry allegation have been found proved. Independent witnesses have supported the prosecution case. The applicant has been caught red handed however, she could not show that any demand was made by the applicant which has been recorded in the trap proceedings.

¶12

Perused the record.

¶13

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 06.06.2024 having no criminal history and prima facie, there is no material to show that any demand was made by the applicant, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant Avnish Singh @ Avinash be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

¶16

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(iv) 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

¶20

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.

¶21

(v) 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.

¶22

(vi) 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

Order Date :- 23.8.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶24

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

Avnish Singh @ Avinash v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avnish Singh @ Avinash v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home 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

Manoj Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lko.

Rajesh Mishra @ Rajesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Gurjant Singh Dhillon Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Sushil Kumar Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secy. Lko.

Irshad Ahmad and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Dilshad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.