Vivek Bhushan Srivastav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Aug 2025NABAIL/406/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail confirmed for applicant accused of fraudulent withdrawal of scholarship funds; court relies on Sushila Aggarwal precedent and applicant's denial of involvement.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail made absolute with conditions: personal bond and two sureties, cooperation with investigation, no inducement or tampering, not leave India without permission. ¶¶29

Vivek Bhushan Srivastav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48401

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 406 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Vivek Bhushan Srivastav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anupam Bajpai,Puneet Kumar Srivastava

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Garima Singh,Sharad Yadav

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

Heard Shri Pawan Kumar Dwivedi, Advocate holding brief of Shri Anupam Bajpai, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Jayant Singh Tomar, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and Ms. Garima Singh, learned counsel for the complainant.

¶8

The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by means of the following order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 07.05.2025:

¶9

"1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party no.1-State.

¶10

2. Issue notice to opposite party no.2.

¶11

2A. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶12

3. First Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with regard to Case Crime no.10 of 2025 under Sections 316(2), 318(2), 351(2), 352 B.N.S. P.S. Ram Nagar, District Barabanki.

¶13

4. As per contents of first information report, allegations levelled against applicant is that he was instrumental in opening a Bank Account in the name of informant and providing some other Mobile phone number due to which the scholarship amount which was credited into account in the name of informant was surreptitiously withdrawn.

¶14

5. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him which would be evident from fact that admittedly the mobile numbers indicated in the F.I.R. do not belong to applicant and no amount has been credited into account of applicant. It is submitted that previous criminal history against applicant of one another case has been explained and applicant is cooperating in

¶15

the investigation.

¶16

6. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed anticipatory bail with submission that averments made in the F.I.R. clearly indicate complicity of applicant in allegations levelled against him. It is however admitted that previous criminal history of applicant has been explained and investigation is still ongoing.

¶17

7. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, it appears that applicant is denying that mobile numbers indicated in the F.I.R. and that indicated in the account opening form belong to him. The aspect as to whether any credit was made into account of applicant is also under consideration in the investigation. Previous criminal history of applicant has been explained. Thus, in view of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, it would be appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C./482 BNSS.

¶18

8. List this case on 22.05.2025, as fresh, along with service report.

¶19

9. Objections may be filed in the meantime.

¶20

10. In view of above, interim anticipatory bail is granted to applicant providing that in the event of arrest, applicant Vivek Bhushan Srivastav shall be released on interim bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶21

(i) That the accused-applicant shall make himself/herself available for interrogation by police authorities as and when required and will cooperate with the investigation;

¶22

(ii) That the accused-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; and

¶23

(iii) That the accused-applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

¶24

(iv) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this order."

¶25

The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith a copy of the materials collected during the investigation.

¶26

The complainant has also filed a counter affidavit.

¶27

The learned A.G.A. does not allege misuse of any condition of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶28

Keeping in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, there is nothing which may persuade this Court from taking a different view than the one taken by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶29

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. The interim order dated 07.05.2025 is made absolute in terms of the aforesaid order.

¶30

Order Date :- 18.8.2025 S. Shivhare

¶31

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

Vivek Bhushan Srivastav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vivek Bhushan Srivastav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

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

Suraj Soni @ Suraj Kumar Soni Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chif Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Sanjay Yadav Vs Central Bureau of Investigation Anti Corruption Bureau New Delhi and Another

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

Usha Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Sanjivani Rastogi Thru. Her Father Krishna Gopal Rastogi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Anwaar Ali vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.