Allahabad High Court
Yogendra Nath Yadav vs State Of U.P. And Another on 29 August, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:173927
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9117 of 2023
Applicant :- Yogendra Nath Yadav
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Shesh Nath Singh Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pramod Kumar Rai
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. 817 of 2008, under sections 419,420,467,468,471,120-B IPC, P.S. Cantt, District Varanasi during the pendency of trial.
3. In short allegation against the applicant is that despite being transferred from one place to another the applicant could not join the transferred place and he is said to have fraudulently drawing salary by entering his name in the pay sheet.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the FIR, false allegation has been levelled against the applicant. He further submits that on being transferred from Police Line Varanasi, he was never relieved from his duty by the Incharge, Police Line, Varanasi to join his transferred place of posting. He has been continuously working in Police Line, Varanasi since 2005 to 2008 and further the applicant is still working and he has never been suspended and presently he is working in District Prayagraj. It is further contended that it is a purely service dispute which has been given a dispute of criminal nature. It is further submitted that the applicant earlier approached this court against the FIR by filing Criminal Misc Writ Petition No. 19689 of 2008 in which interim protection from arrest has been granted till submission of charge sheet. It is further submitted that charge sheet in the matter has been submitted in the year 2009 but till date no NBW has been issued against the applicant. It is further submitted that no recovery proceedings has been initiated against the applicant and the applicant is continuously drawing his salary till date. It is further submitted that no offence as alleged has been committed by the applicant. 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. However, it is submitted that Bailable warrant is issued against the applicant.
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 Yogendra Nath Yadav 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 :- 29.8.2023
RavindraKSingh
