Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

The instant bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 494 of 2020 u/s 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station- Gomti Nagar, DistrictLucknow.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant, who is in jail since 17.10.2020, has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant has been implicated in 226 cases of identical allegations, out of which, he has been enlarged on bail in 140 cases. He next submits that the applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial and as the charge has not been framed till date, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail. However, they could not dispute the submission of the applicant's counsel.

¶14

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perusing the F.I.R. as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that the applicant is in jail since 17.10.2020, but the charge has not been framed till date. Therefore, the applicant is entitled for bail.

¶15

BAIL No. 4380 of 2025

¶16

2

¶17

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶18

Let the applicant- Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava , who is involved in aforementioned case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to following conditions:

¶19

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶20

(ii) 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.

¶21

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of 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.

¶22

(iv) 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 I.P.C./269 B.N.S.

¶23

(v) 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./84 B.N.S.S. may be issued and if 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 I.P.C./209 B.N.S.

¶24

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without

¶25

BAIL No. 4380 of 2025

¶26

3

¶27

sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶28

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶29

The presence of Mr. Veer Bahadur Dubey, Sub Inspector, Police Station- Sarojini Nagar, District- Lucknow is hereby dispensed with.

¶30

The trial Court shall conclude the trial expeditiously without giving any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶31

(Rajeev Singh,J.)

¶32

September 15, 2025

¶33

Arpan

¶34

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

Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home U.P. 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

Hanuman Prasad Verma and Another Vs Shri Manoj Kumar Sonkar Conservator of Forest Devi Patan Circle U.P. Gonda

Phool Chandra Shukla Vs Shri Manoj Kumar Sonkar, Conservator of Forest Devi Patan Mandal U.P. Gonda

Afzal Ali Rabiul Hasan Sayyed Vs Shri Abhay Kumar Singh, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Tulsipur, Distt. Balrampur

Mohd. Owais Hashmi Vs Sri Anil Kumar-Iii, Ias, Prin. Secy. Environment, Forest and Climate Change Deptt. Lko. and Others

Suresh Chandra Shukla Vs Dr. Hari Om, Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Vocation Education and Skill Development Lko. and Another

Prem Harizan @ Prem Chandra @ Premraidas Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko