Abhay Kumar Shrivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10570

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 308 of 2025

Applicant :- Abhay Kumar Shrivastava Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Baljeet Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Rejoinder affidavit filed today by the counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 118 of 2024, under Sections 447, 511, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 IPC, Police Station- Chinhat, DistrictLucknow.

¶9

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the applicant is the receiver of agreement to sale and he himself is victimized as he had no knowledge that one Shivraj, the coaccused is executing the agreement to sale on the basis of the some forged document. He next added that identically situated co-accused, namely, Shiv Raj has already been enlarged on bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 775 of 2025 vide order dated 18.2.2025 passed by this Court and applicant is seeking parity of the same. He further submits that the dispute, if any, is civil in nature and that has been given colour of criminality by way of lodging FIR. He further added that charge-sheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper with the evidences or would threaten the witnesses. He also submits that the applicant has three cases criminal history which have been explained in the rejoinder affidavit filed today and he is languishing in jail since 6.11.2024. He further submits that the applicant undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶10

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that after thorough investigation, it was found that the applicant was

¶11

involved in committing the offence and as such, charge-sheet has been filed against him. He also added that the applicant has three cases criminal history and thus, he is not entitled for any relief.

¶12

Learned AGA appearing for the State has also supported the version of the counsel for the complainant.

¶13

Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is languishing in jail since 6.11.2024; the dispute, if any, is civil in nature and that has been given colour of criminality by way of lodging FIR; identically situated co-accused, namely, Shiv Raj has already been enlarged on bail by this Court; charge-sheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper with the evidences or would threaten the witnesses; the applicant has three cases criminal history which have been explained in the rejoinder affidavit filed today coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶14

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

¶15

Let the applicant- Abhay Kumar Shrivastava involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶16

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

¶17

(2) 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. He 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;

¶18

(3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and

¶19

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶21

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶22

Order Date :- 18.2.2025 Shravan

¶23

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

Abhay Kumar Shrivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhay Kumar Shrivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

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.

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

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

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