Gitesh Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:27051

Court No. - 70

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11639 of 2024

Applicant :- Gitesh Kumar Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Manish Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 0289 of 2022, under Section 409 IPC, Police Station- Cantt, District- Gorakhpur, till conclusion of trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Applicant was Assistant Post Master in Sub Post Office, Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur. Applicant is not named in the FIR. The name of applicant has dragged in the present case, whereas, there is no evidence to prosecute the applicant in the present case. The I.O. has filed charge sheet against the named coaccused and investigation is pending against the applicant. Applicant having no concern with the alleged incident. In different case crime number applicant arrest has been stayed by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 15.05.2023, the order is quoted herein below:

¶9

"Issue notice to the respondents.

¶10

In the meanwhile, there shall be interim protection against arrest of the petitioner, subject to the petitioner diligently participating in the investigation and also complying with the conditions under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.)."

¶11

Applicant's counsel further submitted that in case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that as per record and documents filed as Annexure 5 to the affidavit, prima facie, offence is made out

¶13

against the applicant. Annexure 5, enquiry report discloses that applicant embezzled a sum of Rs.6,11,200/- and has been withdrawn from the accounts, moreover, applicant and co-accused jointly embezzled amount Rs.52,56,263/-. On perusal of enquiry report, prima facie , offence is made out against the applicant in the aforesaid sections. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant may be rejected.

¶14

The object of Anticipatory bail is that a person should not be unnecessarily harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy personal vendetta or grudge of complainant or any other person operating the things directly or from behind the curtains.

¶15

It is well settled that discretionary power conferred by the legislature on this Court cannot be put in a straitjacket formula but such discretionary power either grant or refusal of anticipatory bail has to be exercised carefully in appropriate cases with circumspection on the basis of the available material after evaluating the facts of the particular case and considering other relevant factors (nature and gravity of accusation, role attributed to accused, conduct of accused, criminal antecedents, possibility of the applicant to flee from justice, apprehension of tempering of the witnesses or threat to the complainant, impact of grant of anticipatory bail in investigation or society etc.) with meticulous precision maintaining balance between the conflicting interest, namely, sanctity of individual liberty and interest of society.

¶16

Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case and considering the submissions advanced, the nature and gravity of the accusation, I find no good ground for anticipatory bail to the applicant in the aforesaid case. No interference is warranted.

¶17

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected .

¶18

Order Date :- 27.2.2025 Nitin Verma

¶19

Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Gitesh Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gitesh Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases