Vijay Kumar Alias Bablu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10744

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3 of 2025

Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Alias Bablu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Pratap Singh,Akhil Pratap Singh,Anuj Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed today by learned Counsel for the State is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State as well as perused the material placed on record.

¶8

Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No. 0118 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 506 IPC, Police Station Mahmudabad, District Sitapur.

¶9

From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 07.01.2025, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:-

¶10

"Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶11

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0118 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420 and 506 I.P.C. 1860, Police Station Mahmudabad, District Sitapur.

¶12

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is a teacher and false allegation has been leveled against him that he has misappropriated some public fund. He next submits that the F.I.R. has been lodged in way back 2018 and charge sheet has been filed in 2020 and it has specifically been stated in para 26 of the application that neither N.B.W nor proclamation under Section 82 has been issued yet and it is not a case that the applicant has ever absconded from the investigation proceedings as well as proceedings before the trial court. He further submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is a law abiding citizen and he has acute apprehension of being arrested by the police, as such, he may be granted anticipatory bail which he will not misuse.

¶13

On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that the applicant

¶14

is named in the F.I.R. and there is sufficient proof that he has committed cheat and fraud, as such, he is not entitled to any relief.

¶15

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court find it to be a fit case of anticipatory bail.

¶16

Till the next date of listing, the present applicant Vijay Kumar alias Bablu shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶17

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶18

(ii) that 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

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶20

(iv) that in case charge sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶21

(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶22

(vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶23

(vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶24

List/put up this matter in second week of February 2025.

¶25

In the meantime, learned counsel for the State shall file the counter affidavit . "

¶26

From perusal of the order dated 07.01.2025, it transpires that State counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thoroughly considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceeding or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case.

¶27

In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Vijay Kumar @ Bablu till disposal of

¶28

the trial subject to the following conditions:-

¶29

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶30

(ii) that 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;

¶31

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶32

(iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and

¶33

(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶34

In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this protection.

¶35

Order Date :- 18.2.2025 kkv/

¶36

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

Vijay Kumar Alias Bablu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Kumar Alias Bablu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pappu Chauhan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Sugendra Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home U.P. Lko.

Rahul Dixit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Sarfaraz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Cb.Cid, Lko.

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

Sudhanshu Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home/Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another