Sri Kunwar Tejendra Bahadur, learned AGA, for the State v. Station Sikandarpur, District Ballia

4. Sri Kunwar Tejendra Bahadur, learned AGA, for the State, apprised the Court that he has received the instructions, therefore, the instant anticipatory bail application may be finally disposed off.

5. Heard Sri M.S.Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Kunwar Tejendra Bahadur, learned AGA, for the State.

6. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Special Trial No.53 of 2025 (State Vs. Harish Chandra and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 46A of 2006, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 201, 218, 120-B and 34 IPC and Section 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Sikandarpur, District Ballia, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was posted as Gram Panchayat Adhikari and as per allegation, he and others misappropriate the public money but entire allegation levelled against the applicant is totally false.

8. He further submitted that FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2006 and investigation of the case was continued till

07.05.2024 and during pendency of the investigation when Investigating Officer tried to arrest of the applicant then applicant challenged the FIR of the present case before this Court vide Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 22861 of 2024 and on

13.12.2024 Division Bench of this Court was pleased to stay the arrest the applicant till submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. He further submitted that the order passed by Division Bench of this Court has been annexed at page no. 45 of the paper book.

9. He further submitted that now charge sheet has been filed against the applicant on 07.05.2024 and on 17.01.2025 cognizance order and summoning order have been passed against the applicant. He further submitted that applicant is having apprehension that if pursuant to the summoning order, he will appear before the trial court, he will be arrested.

10. He further submitted that as during trial applicant was not arrested pursuant to the order passed by this Court and there is no allegation that he misused the liberty granted to him, applicant should be enlarged on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial.

11. He further submitted that applicant has already been retired from service in the year 2012.

12. He further submitted that applicant is not having any previous criminal history to his credit.

13. Per contra, learned A.G.A. however, opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

14. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

15. However, as per allegation, applicant was Gram Panchayat Adhikari and he embezzled the public fund along with others but it reflects, FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2006 and investigation of the case was continued till May, 2024 and during investigation, arrest of the applicant was stayed by Division Bench of this Court till submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

16. Further, now charge sheet has been filed against the applicant on 07.05.2024 and on 17.01.2025 summoning order has been passed. Considering the general practice adopted now-a-days by the courts concerned, apprehension of arrest raised by the applicant cannot be completely ruled out.

17. Further, there is no allegation that applicant misused the liberty granted by Division Bench of this Court to him during pendency of the investigation.

18. Further, as investigation of the case has already been concluded, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant.

19. Further, applicant has already been retired from the service way back in the year 2012.

20. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history to his credit.

21. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial.

22. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed.

23. In the event of arrest of the applicant-Sudhir Srivastava involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:- ii. that 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 or tamper with the evidence; ii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court; iii. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; v. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

24. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

25. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 8.7.2025 SKM SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

4. Sri Kunwar Tejendra Bahadur, learned AGA, for the State, apprised the Court that he has received the instructions, therefore, the instant anticipatory bail application may be finally disposed off.

5. Heard Sri M.S.Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Kunwar Tejendra Bahadur, learned AGA, for the State.

6. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Special Trial No.53 of 2025 (State Vs. Harish Chandra and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 46A of 2006, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 201, 218, 120-B and 34 IPC and Section 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Sikandarpur, District Ballia, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was posted as Gram Panchayat Adhikari and as per allegation, he and others misappropriate the public money but entire allegation levelled against the applicant is totally false.

8. He further submitted that FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2006 and investigation of the case was continued till

07.05.2024 and during pendency of the investigation when Investigating Officer tried to arrest of the applicant then applicant challenged the FIR of the present case before this Court vide Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 22861 of 2024 and on

13.12.2024 Division Bench of this Court was pleased to stay the arrest the applicant till submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. He further submitted that the order passed by Division Bench of this Court has been annexed at page no. 45 of the paper book.

9. He further submitted that now charge sheet has been filed against the applicant on 07.05.2024 and on 17.01.2025 cognizance order and summoning order have been passed against the applicant. He further submitted that applicant is having apprehension that if pursuant to the summoning order, he will appear before the trial court, he will be arrested.

10. He further submitted that as during trial applicant was not arrested pursuant to the order passed by this Court and there is no allegation that he misused the liberty granted to him, applicant should be enlarged on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial.

11. He further submitted that applicant has already been retired from service in the year 2012.

12. He further submitted that applicant is not having any previous criminal history to his credit.

13. Per contra, learned A.G.A. however, opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

14. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

15. However, as per allegation, applicant was Gram Panchayat Adhikari and he embezzled the public fund along with others but it reflects, FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2006 and investigation of the case was continued till May, 2024 and during investigation, arrest of the applicant was stayed by Division Bench of this Court till submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

16. Further, now charge sheet has been filed against the applicant on 07.05.2024 and on 17.01.2025 summoning order has been passed. Considering the general practice adopted now-a-days by the courts concerned, apprehension of arrest raised by the applicant cannot be completely ruled out.

17. Further, there is no allegation that applicant misused the liberty granted by Division Bench of this Court to him during pendency of the investigation.

18. Further, as investigation of the case has already been concluded, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant.

19. Further, applicant has already been retired from the service way back in the year 2012.

20. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history to his credit.

21. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial.

22. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed.

23. In the event of arrest of the applicant-Sudhir Srivastava involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:- ii. that 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 or tamper with the evidence; ii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court; iii. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; v. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

24. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

25. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 8.7.2025 SKM SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad