Chhotu v. State of U.P., this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of furthe

2. Heard Sri Vivek Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ram Prakash Shukla, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

3. This anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Dhananjay Kumar, seeking anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest in Case Crime No. 03 of 2022, under Sections 201, 417, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B I.P.C. and Sections 7, 13(1)(a), 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station- Varanasi Sector (Vigilance Cell), District Varanasi.

4. Prior notice of this anticipatory bail application was served in the office of the learned Government Advocate, High Court, Allahabad and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.: 8072 of 2020 - Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P., this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned State counsel as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U.P. Amendment) is not required since learned counsel for the State informs the Court that he has received the required instructions in the matter.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted while placing para no. 11 of the affidavit that appointment of Soni Devi was made on the contract basis on 02.09.2006 for one year, for which annexure no. 4 to the affidavit has been placed. Further while placing para-12 of the affidavit it is submitted that at the time of appointment of Soni Devi as Panchayat Mitra, Chhote Lal was posted as Village Panchayat Officer for village panchayat Jamuhar and the applicant was posted in other village, copy of office memorandum in this regard has been placed before the Court which is annexure no. 5 to the affidavit. It is further submitted by placing para-13 of the affidavit that after transfer of Chhote Lal to another village panchayat, the applicant was posted on 18.09.2006 and at the time of appointment of Soni Devi, Chhote Lal was still posted at village panchayat- Jamuhar and he was still posted in other gram panchayat area, annexure no. 6 to the affidavit has been placed for the same. It is submitted that investigation in the matter is pending and charge sheet has not been filed, para-32 of the affidavit has been placed for the same. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent as stated in para - 28 of the affidavit. It is submitted that co-accused Krishna Kumar Singh has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 18.12.2024 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 12041 of 2024, copy of the said order is annexure no. 9 to the affidavit in support of this application.

6. Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that it is evident that the allegation against the applicant is of not taking action on getting information regarding illegal appointment of Panchayat Mitra. The appointment was done much prior to the applicant joining the said post. The investigation is under progress and charge sheet has not been filed as yet.

8. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation and the fact that he has no criminal antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

9. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Dhananjay Kumar involved in the said Case Crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer/S.H.O. concerned within a period of ten days from today and file certified copy of this order for its compliance. (ii) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police office as and when required; (iii) 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; (iv) 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 S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

10. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

11. The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

12. The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

13. The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is disposed of.

14. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 17.2.2025 Naresh NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri Vivek Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ram Prakash Shukla, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

3. This anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Dhananjay Kumar, seeking anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest in Case Crime No. 03 of 2022, under Sections 201, 417, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B I.P.C. and Sections 7, 13(1)(a), 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station- Varanasi Sector (Vigilance Cell), District Varanasi.

4. Prior notice of this anticipatory bail application was served in the office of the learned Government Advocate, High Court, Allahabad and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.: 8072 of 2020 - Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P., this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned State counsel as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U.P. Amendment) is not required since learned counsel for the State informs the Court that he has received the required instructions in the matter.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted while placing para no. 11 of the affidavit that appointment of Soni Devi was made on the contract basis on 02.09.2006 for one year, for which annexure no. 4 to the affidavit has been placed. Further while placing para-12 of the affidavit it is submitted that at the time of appointment of Soni Devi as Panchayat Mitra, Chhote Lal was posted as Village Panchayat Officer for village panchayat Jamuhar and the applicant was posted in other village, copy of office memorandum in this regard has been placed before the Court which is annexure no. 5 to the affidavit. It is further submitted by placing para-13 of the affidavit that after transfer of Chhote Lal to another village panchayat, the applicant was posted on 18.09.2006 and at the time of appointment of Soni Devi, Chhote Lal was still posted at village panchayat- Jamuhar and he was still posted in other gram panchayat area, annexure no. 6 to the affidavit has been placed for the same. It is submitted that investigation in the matter is pending and charge sheet has not been filed, para-32 of the affidavit has been placed for the same. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent as stated in para - 28 of the affidavit. It is submitted that co-accused Krishna Kumar Singh has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 18.12.2024 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 12041 of 2024, copy of the said order is annexure no. 9 to the affidavit in support of this application.

6. Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that it is evident that the allegation against the applicant is of not taking action on getting information regarding illegal appointment of Panchayat Mitra. The appointment was done much prior to the applicant joining the said post. The investigation is under progress and charge sheet has not been filed as yet.

8. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation and the fact that he has no criminal antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

9. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Dhananjay Kumar involved in the said Case Crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer/S.H.O. concerned within a period of ten days from today and file certified copy of this order for its compliance. (ii) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police office as and when required; (iii) 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; (iv) 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 S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

10. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

11. The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

12. The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

13. The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is disposed of.

14. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 17.2.2025 Naresh NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad