Allahabad High Court
Raj Kumar Yadav vs State Of U.P. And Another on 11 January, 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. - 5820 of 2021
Applicant :- Raj Kumar Yadav
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Pal Singh,Mohd. Tabrez Iqbal,Sunil Dixit,Sunil Kumar Awasthi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
The applicant has moved the present application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying for grant of anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0418 of 2020 under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 409 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Bhinga, District Shrawasti.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Vide order dated 21.6.2021, the applicant was granted interim protection by a coordinate Bench of this Court. Gist of the issue involved in the present matter is given in the said order, which is extracted below :
"The Court convened through video conferencing.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0418 of 2020 under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 409 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Bhinga, District Shrawasti.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated merely on the basis of forged certificate of CCC submitted by him. He further submitted that after qualifying the competitive examination, appointment was given to him. He further submitted that in the most mechanical manner and without giving any proper opportunity of hearing, he was terminated from his service, on the basis of presumption that the document is forged one. He further submitted that on 20.11.2020, notice was given to the applicant for explaining the fact by giving 24 hours' time, on the next date, reminder was issued and thereafter on 24.11.2011, another reminder was also issued by giving time for explanation up to 26.11.2020. On 26.11.2020, after receiving the show cause notice, explanation was given and also requested that CCC certificate may be verified again, but his request was rejected and thereafter, on 23.12.2020, FIR was lodged. He further submitted that merely on the basis of presumption, the police is trying to arrest the applicant, as the applicant is ready to cooperate the investigation.
Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of applicant and submitted that CCC certificate of applicant was found forged during verification, but he does not dispute the fact that in the termination order, it is mentioned that notice was issued on 20.11.2020 and thereafter, reminder was issued on 21.12.2020. Later on 26.11.2020, termination order was passed.
Considering the argument of learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, it is evident that on the basis of CCC certificate, appointment was given to the applicant and thereafter, as per the prosecution case, it was verified and which was found forged, but it is also undisputed that on 20.11.2020, notice was issued for explaining the fact by giving 24 hours' time. On 21.11.2020, reminder was given to the applicant, and thereafter on 26.11.2020 reminder was also given and last opportunity up to 26.11.2020. On 26.11.2020, reply was given to the applicant and requested that the CCC certificate again is to verify from the agency, but his request was not considered and he was terminated from his service on 26.11.2020, thereafter, FIR was lodged, therefore, the matter required consideration.
Till the next date of listing, in the event of arrest of the applicant, namely, Raj Kumar Yadav in the aforesaid case, he shall be released forthwith by the Station House Officer of the police station concerned, on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with the following condition:-
(i) That the accused-applicant shall make themselves available for interrogation by police authorities as and when required and will cooperate with the investigation;
(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; and
(iii) That the accused-applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
However, it is directed that the applicant will join and participate in each and every aspect of Investigation and will lend full assistance to the Investigating Agency, even with regard to 'discovery of fact' if and when required so by the Investigating Agency.
List in the last week of August, 2021 for final disposal.
In the meantime, the AGA may file objection.
The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. "
It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that after the protection granted by this court, the applicant has cooperated in the investigation. Charge sheet has been filed and he is apprehending arrest. He further submits that re-verification of CCC certificate from independent agency has not been considered.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer made by the applicant's counsel, however, he does not dispute the fact that the applicant has cooperated during investigation and has no criminal antecedent. .
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and having no criminal antecedents, the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial and gravity of offence, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case in the light of judgment of Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, subject to his cooperation in the trial.
In view of the above as also keeping in view of the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC OnLine 98, the interim order dated 21.6.2021 (supra) is affirmed. However, the accused applicant is directed to surrender before trial court if he is summoned to face trial for offence in question after filing of the charge sheet. The accused applicant shall be released on bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court, with the following conditions.
(i) 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 tamper with the evidence;
(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;
Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.
It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
In view of the aforesaid, the anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 11.1.2023
kkb/
