Krishna Kant Upadhyay vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:111958

Court No. - 82

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22026 of 2025

Applicant :- Krishna Kant Upadhyay Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Surya Pratap Singh Parmar,Ved Prakash Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri S.P. Singh Parmar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 213 of 2014, under Sections 420, 409, 419, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC and Section 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Chetganj, District Varanasi during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits, FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2014 and as per allegation made in the FIR applicant was Finance Officer in Sampurna Nand Sanskrit University, Varanasi and he along with other accused misappropriated public fund by making excess payment for alleged printed books but entire allegation leveled against the applicant is totally false.

¶9

He further submits, however, FIR in the present matter was lodged in the year 2014 but applicant could not become aware about this fact and when in the year 2023 he became aware that he is accused in this case then he filed anticipatory bail application before the court concerned and thereafter approached this Court but this Court rejected the anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant and thereafter charge-sheet was filed in the present matter on 07.03.2025.

¶10

He further submits, when applicant came to know about submission of the charge-sheet then he approached this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and thereafter pursuant to the order passed by this Court he surrendered before the court concerned on 13.06.2025 and since then he is in jail. He further submits,

¶11

considering the above facts it cannot be said that applicant is an absconder.

¶12

He further submits, bail application of number of other accused persons have been allowed and their bail orders have been annexed along with instant bail application. He further submits, applicant is 77 years old and infirm person and is suffering with number of ailments. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history.

¶13

He further submits, therefore, considering the above facts, applicant should be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Per contra, learned AGA however opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that applicant is 77 years old and infirm person and bail application of number of accused persons have been allowed by this Court and applicant is not having any criminal history.

¶15

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶16

However, FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2014 and there is also allegation that applicant being Finance Officer in Sampurna Nand Sanskrit University, Varanasi embezzled public money by making excess payment for printing the books but it reflects, till 2023 Investigating Officer neither made any attempt to arrest nor made any attempt to interrogate him and thereafter on 07.03.2025 charge-sheet was filed against the applicant.

¶17

Record suggests that however as per investigating agency during investigation applicant did not cooperate with the investigation and he was absconding but considering the fact that during investigation applicant approached the court concerned and this Court for anticipatory bail, it cannot be said that he was trying to evade his arrest.

¶18

Further, record also suggests that after submission of the charge-sheet applicant immediately challenged the charge-sheet before this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and pursuant to the order passed by this Court he surrendered before the court concerned on 13.06.2025. This fact shows his bona fide.

¶19

Further, bail application of other co-accused persons have already been allowed by this Court and it also reflects, investigation of the case continued for almost 11 years.

¶20

Further, applicant is 77 years old and infirm person and he is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 13.06.2025.

¶21

Further, unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and bail application should not be dismissed for punitive purpose.

¶22

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶23

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶24

Let the applicant - Krishna Kant Upadhyay be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶25

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶26

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶27

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶28

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶29

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶30

Order Date :- 14.7.2025 AK Pandey

¶31

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Krishna Kant Upadhyay v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Kant Upadhyay v. State of U.P.

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

Bharti Singh vs State of U.P.

Ranjit Singh vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Abdul Wazid vs State of U.P. and Another

Upendra Nath Mishra vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Alok Singh vs State of U.P.

Meena Verma Alias Meena Rani vs State of U.P.