Smt. Kiran Chaudhary vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:46789

Court No. - 78

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9400 of 2025

Applicant :- Smt. Kiran Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Ranjan Mishra,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

By means of this bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S., applicant- Smt. Kiran Chaudhary, who is involved in Case Crime No.02 of 2025, under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended Act, 2018, Police Station Agra Sector (Vigilance Establishment), District U.P. Vigilance Establishment, Agra seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial.

¶7

Heard Sri G.S. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Alok Ranjan Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State.

¶8

Main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is posted on the post of District Panchayat Raj Officer (D.P.R.O.) and she has been falsely implicated in this case by the complainant because several complaints of financial embezzlement of public money has been received against the complainant, on which an enquiry was going on against him and applicant being District Panchayat Raj Officer had issued reminders to complete the inquiry expeditiously, therefore, the complainant being aggrieved by the action of applicant made a false complaint based on

¶9

concocted facts, on which F.I.R. has been lodged. As per the prosecution case itself, there is no allegation of receiving any bribe amount against the applicant. The allegation of accepting bribe money is against co-accused Bijendra Singh, who was caught redhanded. Except the oral allegation, there is no corroborative material on record to establish that coaccused Bijendra Singh had accepted bribe at the instance of the applicant. Much emphasis has been given by contending that there was no telephonic conversation of applicant with the complainant. It is further submitted that even in the F.I.R., date and time of alleged demand of bribe are also not mentioned, hence the allegation of demand of bribe money against the applicant is also not corroborated from any other material on record. In case applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case. Referring to the ultrasound report of the applicant, it is also pointed out that at present, the applicant is carrying pregnancy of 19 weeks, therefore, the applicant, who is languishing in jail since 05.02.2025 may be enlarged on bail.

¶10

On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that as per the prosecution case, coaccused Bijendra Singh was caught red handed while accepting the bribe amount of Rs. 70,000/- at the instance of the applicant. It is also submitted that telephonic conversation of the co-accused Bijendra Singh with the complainant is also on record, in which he has taken the name of the applicant. Hence, bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected.

¶11

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find that it is not in dispute that the there is no date and time of alleged demand of bribe by the applicant. The bribe amount was also

¶12

not accepted by the applicant, whereas demand and acceptance of bribe amount are sine qua non to constitute an offence under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act. Several complaints with regard to embezzlement of public fund against the complainant and inquiry against him are also not disputed by the learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State. Case of the co-accused Bijendra Singh, who has been caught red handed while accepting the bribe amount is distinguishable from the case of the applicant. Under the facts of the case, possibility of false implication of the applicant cannot be ruled out. Accordingly applicant has made out a prima-facie case for bail.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submission of the learned counsel for the parties as noted above as well as the fact that applicant is having a pregnancy of 19 weeks, the bail application of the applicant is hereby allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant- Smt. Kiran Chaudhary , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶15

(i) That the applicant shall cooperate with the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable.

¶16

(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 her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

(iii) That after her release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity.

¶18

(iv) The identity, status and residential proof of

¶19

sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

¶21

Order Date :- 3.4.2025 Sanjeet

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SANJEET KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Kiran Chaudhary v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Kiran Chaudhary 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

Juvenile X vs State of Up Others

Monu Alias Shrawan vs State of U.P.

Fakir Lal Shah vs State of U.P.

Krishna Mohan vs State of U.P.

Kuldeep Singh Verma @ Kuldeep Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Kuldeep Gond vs State of U.P.