Allahabad High Court
Om Prakash Upadhyay vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home ... on 17 August, 2022
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1329 of 2022
Applicant :- Om Prakash Upadhyay
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow And Anr.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard Sri Vivek Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vinay Kumar Shahi, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R. No.460 of 2016, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC & Section 3/7 E.C. Act at Police Station- Kotwali Dehat, District Gonda with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
As per prosecution story, the owner of the fair price shop, in collusion with the applicant, is stated to have misused his power and usurped the materials pertaining to the fair price shop.
Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is the Gram Pradhan and being the head of the committee, he has been falsely implicated as the main accused person is the proprietor of the fair price shop, namely, Om Prakash Upadhyay. The case of the applicant is on a different footing to the said co-accused person. The charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicant. The applicant has co-operated in the investigation and undertakes that he will cooperate in the trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.
The prayer for anticipatory bail have been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, he could not dispute the said facts.
On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Others vs. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 565". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Om Prakash Upadhyay be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
2. 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
3. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
4. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant;
5. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
6. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
7. that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial or deciding the regular bail application.
Order Date :- 17.8.2022
Ravi Kant
