Arvind Kumar v. State of U.P

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.P.Tripathi, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

This application under Section 482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case No. 8091 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 626 of 2018, under Sections 420, 465, 466, 468, 470, 471 IPC, Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, Section 66D Information Technology (Amendment) Act and Section 34 of Aadhar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, Police Station Civil Lines, District Muzafar Nagar.

Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The name of the applicant surfaced during the course of investigation. No complaint was preferred by the card holders against the Fair Price Shop Dealers. During the pendency of investigation, the applicant was granted the benefit of Section 41-A C.P.C.. It is next contended that identically placed co-accused Dharmpal Singh, Shubham Tayal, Smt. Shagun and lavkush have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 24.11.2022 and 06.12.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application Nos. 11445 of 2022 and 11496 of 2024 respectively. The applicant claims parity. At this stage there is no credible evidence against the applicant. Investigation has been completed. Charge sheet has been submitted. The applicant had co-operated in the investigation. The applicant has been summoned by the concerned court vide order dated 09.04.2025. No custodial interrogation is required. Criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 34 of the affidavit. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. In case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial, he will not misuse the said liberty.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

Having regard to the submissions made, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, in particular the fact, that the applicant was not named in the first information report; the name of the applicant surfaced during the course of investigation; during the pendency of investigation, the applicant was granted the benefit of Section 41-A C.P.C.; identically placed co-accused Dharmpal Singh, Shubham Tayal, Smt. Shagun and lavkush have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court; at this stage, there is no substantive evidence against the applicant, charge sheet has been submitted, the applicant had co-operated in the investigation, no custodial interrogation is required, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail.

In the event of arrest, the applicant Arvind Kumar, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall make himself available on each date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court; (iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport the same shall be deposited by him before the concerned court.

In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.