Allahabad High Court
Rajesh Kumar Agarwal vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 22 February, 2023
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 12
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 446 of 2023
Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Agarwal
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Aman Shankar,Apoorva Jyoti,Neeraj Kumar Rawat
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State/respondent as well as perused the record.
The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.0397 of 2022 under sections 41, 411, 413 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Beekapur, district Faizabad/Ayodhya.
In the prosecution case it is alleged that Ayansh Group appointed the informant on the post of the stockist for distribution of non-alcoholic bear cane and bottles for the North India region. It is alleged in the First Information Report that after the advance deposited by the informant he has been delivered goods by forging stickers of expiry date on the bottles.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a freelancer. He is not even employee of the Ayansh Group. The main accused Arvind Kumar Gupta and Khusboo Gupta, who are the business head as well as proprietor respectively of the Ayansh group have been enlarged on anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 6.2.2023 passed in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application no.153 of 2022 and vide order dated 6.2.2023 passed in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application no.19 of 2022 respectively.
Learned counsel for the applicant seeks parity with the bail orders of the co-accused persons. He submits that there is no specific allegation against the present applicant. He has no criminal history. It is further submitted that after rejection of the anticipatory bail application by the Sessions court the proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. have been initiated agaisnt him.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer, however, he does not dispute the fact that co-accused persons have been enlarged on anticipatory bail by this Court.
On due consideration to the above submissions, perusal of the record, the fact that the main co-accused, named above, has already been enlarged on anticipatory bail, the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the applicant undertakes to cooperated in the investigation; as also the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant protection to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Till filing of the police report, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned.
The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and she will not influence the witness.The accused-applicant will remain present within 20 days' from today before the Investigating Officer concerned, failing which, the benefit of this order shall not be available to him. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of anticipatory bail.
The application is allowed accordingly.
Order Date :- 22.2.2023
Madhu
