Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 18436 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ... on 22 May, 2024

Author: Pankaj Bhatia

Bench: Pankaj Bhatia

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:38631
 
Court No. - 12
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1092 of 2024
 

 
Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Gupta
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Singh,Dharmendra Kumar Singh,Gautam Singh Yadav
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
 

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned AGA for the State and perused the records.

2. The present application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in FIR No.0347 of 2023, under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Hazratganj, District Lucknow.

3. In terms of the FIR it was alleged that for obtaining admission in B.A.M.S. Course, the applicant and the other co-accused had uploaded a certificate issued by Sri Ram Ayurvedic Medical College on 16.07.2023. In terms of the said, after verification, the said certificate issued depicting the eligibility was found to be a forged document and thus, the applicant has been charged for the offences under Section 120B IPC read with Section 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC.

4. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that two persons had approached the applicant with regard to getting admission done under the management quota, and alongwith the documents, the applicant had given certain money through banking channels to the said two persons and it was the said two persons who had uploaded the documents. He further argues that even if the allegations are treated to be correct, the forged educational document cannot be termed as a valuable security. He places reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Shriniwas Pandit Dharamadhikari v. State of Maharashtra; (1980) 4 SCC 551.

5. Learned AGA has opposed the anticipatory bail application by arguing that for the benefit and at the instance of the applicant, the documents were uploaded; the beneficiary of such admission would be the applicant and thus, it cannot be accepted that the applicant had no role to play in the alleged offence.

6. Considering the submissions made at the Bar, prima-facie, the documents were uploaded for getting the admission to the applicant; even if the contention of counsel for the applicant is accepted that the said forged certificates would not be a valuable security, however, the other offences including the offence under Section 120B of IPC cannot be ruled out at this stage.

7. In view of the above, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. The present application for anticipatory bail is rejected.

8. However, the applicant would be at liberty to apply for regular bail, if so advised, in accordance with law..

Order Date :- 22.5.2024

nishant