Allahabad High Court
Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari vs State Of U.P. on 10 August, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:162015
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8981 of 2023
Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
2. This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 158 of 2023, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468,471 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Mahoba, District Mahoba during the pendency of trial.
3. As per FIR, the applicant, who was working as Head Constable having PNO No (personal number) 800910462 and mobile number 8303728836, 9794860446 in District Mahoba till 31 December 2021, is said to have obtained the job in the police department after showing his educational qualification as high school, which is completely fake. It is alleged that the applicant has never passed the high school examination nor appeared in the said examination and he has been appointed on the basis of forged certificate. It is further alleged that when the applicant came to know that the forgery committed by him has come into the knowledge of superior officer and he may be called upon any time, he took retirement on 31.12.2021.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that certain litigation are pending with brother of the applicant and out of the enmity, wife of the brother of the applicant has lodged the present false FIR against the applicant. It is further contended that no any disciplinary proceedings has been initiated against the applicant and now he has been retired from service after completing 35 years of service. The applicant is having definite apprehension that he may be arrested by the police any time.
5. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the said facts.
6. Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, he is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
7. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
(1) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;
(2) 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; and
(3) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(4) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(5) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.
(6) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
(7) 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. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against his in accordance with law.
8. In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
9. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 10.8.2023
RavindraKSingh
