High Court · 2025

1. Learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State are present.

2. This is the second bail application filed by the applicant for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No.39 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120- B of IPC and 6/10 of U.P. Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1998, Police Station- Madhuban Bapudham, District- Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial.

3. The prosecution story, as unfolded, reveals that in the U.P. Radio Cadre of Operator Mechanical, Assistant Operator and Workshop employee Direct Recruitment, 2022, the applicant, Sunil Kumar had appeared in the said examination in place of original candidate Rahul Kumar, which was conducted at Vidhan Public School, Meerut Road, Duhai on 07.02.2024. During verification of biomatric, which was mismatched, it was found that an imposter was appearing in the examination in place of original candidate Rahul Kumar, on the basis of forged admit card and Aadhar Card.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 09.02.2024 and he should be extended the benefit granted to one Pramod Kumar Yadav in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.47588 of 2024 and has relied upon para 10 of the said decision rendered on 04.06.2025, which is extracted hereas under : "10. Recently, the Apex Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 406 of 2013, In Re- Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons, on 23.8.2024 while considering the provisions of Section 436-A CrPC and 479 of BNSS held that BNSS is more beneficial wherein period undergone by first time offender was prescribed as one- third, directed for the immediate implementation of Section 479 of BNSS where the case registered against the under-trials before 1st of July 2024. Relevant paragraph nos. 2 to 6 are extracted hereasunder; "2. Having regard to the fact that the substituted provision under the BNSS is more beneficial vis-a-vis Section 436A of the Code of Criminal 1 For short 'the BNSS' Procedure, 1973, wherein the period undergone by the first time offender was prescribed as up to half of the maximum period of imprisonment specified for such an offence, this Court had called upon the learned Additional Solicitor General to obtain instructions from the Department and submit a clarification regarding application of the said provision to all undertrials across the country.

3. Today, Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned Additional Solicitor General, submits that pursuant to the aforesaid order, instructions have been obtained from the Department to the effect that the aforesaid provision under the BNSS shall apply to all undertrials in pending cases irrespective of whether the case was registered against them before 01 st July, 2024, the date when the newly minted legislation has come into effect.

4. In that view of the matter, it is deemed appropriate to direct immediate implementation of Section 479 of the BNSS by calling upon Superintendents of Jails across the country wherever accused persons are detained as undertrials, to process their applications to the concerned Courts upon their completion of one- half/one-third, as the case may be, of the period mentioned in sub-section (1) of the said provision, for their release on bail. This step will go a long way in easing overcrowding in jails which is the primary focus of this Court in the present petition.

5. The aforesaid steps shall be taken as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months from today. Reports shall be submitted by the Superintendent Jails to their respective Heads of the Department within the same time line for a comprehensive affidavit to be filed by each State Government/Union Territory through their respective Chief Secretaries. The affidavits shall furnish the details of the number of undertrials who would be entitled to extension of the benefit of Section 479 of the BNSS, the number of applications moved before the concerned Courts for their release and the number of undertrials actually released by the date of filing of the affidavits.

6. Compliance of the aforesaid provisions shall be made by the concerned District & Session Judges in all States/UTs who are in-Charge of the Under Trial Review Committees so that there is no laxity in implementation of the aforesaid beneficial provision."

5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

6. I have heard the respective counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

7. Looking to the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail for more than one and a half year and in the instant case, it is an admitted position that the maximum period of punishment provided under the Act of 1998 is one year, however, Section 419 IPC provides for punishment for cheating by impersonation, i.e. whoever cheats by impersonation shall be punished with an imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years or with fine or with both. While Section 420 IPC deals with cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property, Section 467 deals with forgery of valuable security, Wills and other documents, while Section 468 IPC is in regard to forgery for the purpose of cheating and the term of punishment is extendable up to seven years. It is also a case under Section 471 IPC, which deals with using a genuine fraud (document or electronic records).

8. The FIR lodged against the applicant though, prima facie, discloses that the applicant had appeared in the U.P. Radio Cadre of Operator Mechanical, Assistant Operator and Workshop Employee Direct Recruitment, 2022 in place of original candidate Rahul Kumar at Vidhan Public School, Meerut Road, Duhai on 07.02.2024, but looking to the fact that offence under Section 419 IPC, which is a punishment for cheating by impersonation along with Section 6/10 of the Act of 1998, is made out, the maximum punishment provided under the Act of 1998 is one year, while that of Section 419 IPC is three years.

9. Thus, in view of the recent decision of Apex Court rendered on 23.8.2024 in case of In Re- Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons, the beneficial provision of Section 479 BNSS has to be given precedence over Section 436-A CrPC.

10. In view of the above, let the applicant- Sunil Kumar, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (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. (iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned.

11. In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail. Order Date :- 5.8.2025 V.S.Singh VIDYA SAGAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State are present.

2. This is the second bail application filed by the applicant for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No.39 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120- B of IPC and 6/10 of U.P. Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1998, Police Station- Madhuban Bapudham, District- Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial.

3. The prosecution story, as unfolded, reveals that in the U.P. Radio Cadre of Operator Mechanical, Assistant Operator and Workshop employee Direct Recruitment, 2022, the applicant, Sunil Kumar had appeared in the said examination in place of original candidate Rahul Kumar, which was conducted at Vidhan Public School, Meerut Road, Duhai on 07.02.2024. During verification of biomatric, which was mismatched, it was found that an imposter was appearing in the examination in place of original candidate Rahul Kumar, on the basis of forged admit card and Aadhar Card.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 09.02.2024 and he should be extended the benefit granted to one Pramod Kumar Yadav in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.47588 of 2024 and has relied upon para 10 of the said decision rendered on 04.06.2025, which is extracted hereas under : "10. Recently, the Apex Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 406 of 2013, In Re- Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons, on 23.8.2024 while considering the provisions of Section 436-A CrPC and 479 of BNSS held that BNSS is more beneficial wherein period undergone by first time offender was prescribed as one- third, directed for the immediate implementation of Section 479 of BNSS where the case registered against the under-trials before 1st of July 2024. Relevant paragraph nos. 2 to 6 are extracted hereasunder; "2. Having regard to the fact that the substituted provision under the BNSS is more beneficial vis-a-vis Section 436A of the Code of Criminal 1 For short 'the BNSS' Procedure, 1973, wherein the period undergone by the first time offender was prescribed as up to half of the maximum period of imprisonment specified for such an offence, this Court had called upon the learned Additional Solicitor General to obtain instructions from the Department and submit a clarification regarding application of the said provision to all undertrials across the country.

3. Today, Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned Additional Solicitor General, submits that pursuant to the aforesaid order, instructions have been obtained from the Department to the effect that the aforesaid provision under the BNSS shall apply to all undertrials in pending cases irrespective of whether the case was registered against them before 01 st July, 2024, the date when the newly minted legislation has come into effect.

4. In that view of the matter, it is deemed appropriate to direct immediate implementation of Section 479 of the BNSS by calling upon Superintendents of Jails across the country wherever accused persons are detained as undertrials, to process their applications to the concerned Courts upon their completion of one- half/one-third, as the case may be, of the period mentioned in sub-section (1) of the said provision, for their release on bail. This step will go a long way in easing overcrowding in jails which is the primary focus of this Court in the present petition.

5. The aforesaid steps shall be taken as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months from today. Reports shall be submitted by the Superintendent Jails to their respective Heads of the Department within the same time line for a comprehensive affidavit to be filed by each State Government/Union Territory through their respective Chief Secretaries. The affidavits shall furnish the details of the number of undertrials who would be entitled to extension of the benefit of Section 479 of the BNSS, the number of applications moved before the concerned Courts for their release and the number of undertrials actually released by the date of filing of the affidavits.

6. Compliance of the aforesaid provisions shall be made by the concerned District & Session Judges in all States/UTs who are in-Charge of the Under Trial Review Committees so that there is no laxity in implementation of the aforesaid beneficial provision."

5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

6. I have heard the respective counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

7. Looking to the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail for more than one and a half year and in the instant case, it is an admitted position that the maximum period of punishment provided under the Act of 1998 is one year, however, Section 419 IPC provides for punishment for cheating by impersonation, i.e. whoever cheats by impersonation shall be punished with an imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years or with fine or with both. While Section 420 IPC deals with cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property, Section 467 deals with forgery of valuable security, Wills and other documents, while Section 468 IPC is in regard to forgery for the purpose of cheating and the term of punishment is extendable up to seven years. It is also a case under Section 471 IPC, which deals with using a genuine fraud (document or electronic records).

8. The FIR lodged against the applicant though, prima facie, discloses that the applicant had appeared in the U.P. Radio Cadre of Operator Mechanical, Assistant Operator and Workshop Employee Direct Recruitment, 2022 in place of original candidate Rahul Kumar at Vidhan Public School, Meerut Road, Duhai on 07.02.2024, but looking to the fact that offence under Section 419 IPC, which is a punishment for cheating by impersonation along with Section 6/10 of the Act of 1998, is made out, the maximum punishment provided under the Act of 1998 is one year, while that of Section 419 IPC is three years.

9. Thus, in view of the recent decision of Apex Court rendered on 23.8.2024 in case of In Re- Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons, the beneficial provision of Section 479 BNSS has to be given precedence over Section 436-A CrPC.

10. In view of the above, let the applicant- Sunil Kumar, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (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. (iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned.

11. In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail. Order Date :- 5.8.2025 V.S.Singh VIDYA SAGAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad