High Court · 2025

Applicant :- Kuldeep Agarwal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Of U.P. Lko. U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Kumar,Devesh Srivastava,Devika Singh,Sarvesh Kumar Tiwari,Satish Gulati Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Supplementary affidavit filed today by counsel for the applicant is taken on record. From perusal of the ordersheet, it transpires that the State was directed to seek instructions regarding the genuineness of the FDR No. 740045110006638 and in compliance thereof, written instructions is placed dated 12.02.2025 sent by Sub-Inspector P.S.- Kotwali City District- Hardoi and the same is taken on record and that shall be the part of the record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 0617 of 2024 under sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC, P.S.- Kotwali City District - Hardoi. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that in brief, the allegation against the applicant is that he had prepared an FDR No. 740045110006638 in favour of District Excise Officer, Hardoi, which is allegedly fake, but the same is not true as the aforesaid FDR is in fact, issued by the bank and that is genuine. He has drawn attention towards the supplementary affidavit and added that the bank concerned has certified that the F.D.R No. 740045110006638 is in the name of Kuldeep Aggarwal, the present applicant, issued on 23.03.2022' amounting Rs. 26,500/- pledged to Jila Abkari Adhikari, Hardoi. He submits that the story narrated against the applicant is false and concocted and he was never involved in committing the offence coupled with the fact that the applicant has five cases criminal history which has been explained in paragraph no. 7 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 27.11.2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid, but he admitted on the basis of instructions that the FDR issued and placed in favour of Jila Abkari Adhikari is genuine one. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the case against the applicant is that he got issued FDR No. 740045110006638 and the same was alleged to be fake in the first information report lodged against the applicant whereas, as per the instructions placed by counsel for the State, it is reported that the FDR is issued by the bank concerned and i.e. genuine one. This Court also taken note of the certificate issued by the bank concerned appended alongwith the supplementary affidavit that the FDR concerned is a genuine one. Further, there is no complaint that the applicant is absconding from the investigation proceedings and applicant is languishing in jail since 27.11.2024; the applicant has five cases criminal history which has been explained in paragraph no. 7 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant- Kuldeep Agarwal involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 12.2.2025 Mayank MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Applicant :- Kuldeep Agarwal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Of U.P. Lko. U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Kumar,Devesh Srivastava,Devika Singh,Sarvesh Kumar Tiwari,Satish Gulati Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Supplementary affidavit filed today by counsel for the applicant is taken on record. From perusal of the ordersheet, it transpires that the State was directed to seek instructions regarding the genuineness of the FDR No. 740045110006638 and in compliance thereof, written instructions is placed dated 12.02.2025 sent by Sub-Inspector P.S.- Kotwali City District- Hardoi and the same is taken on record and that shall be the part of the record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 0617 of 2024 under sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC, P.S.- Kotwali City District - Hardoi. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that in brief, the allegation against the applicant is that he had prepared an FDR No. 740045110006638 in favour of District Excise Officer, Hardoi, which is allegedly fake, but the same is not true as the aforesaid FDR is in fact, issued by the bank and that is genuine. He has drawn attention towards the supplementary affidavit and added that the bank concerned has certified that the F.D.R No. 740045110006638 is in the name of Kuldeep Aggarwal, the present applicant, issued on 23.03.2022' amounting Rs. 26,500/- pledged to Jila Abkari Adhikari, Hardoi. He submits that the story narrated against the applicant is false and concocted and he was never involved in committing the offence coupled with the fact that the applicant has five cases criminal history which has been explained in paragraph no. 7 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 27.11.2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid, but he admitted on the basis of instructions that the FDR issued and placed in favour of Jila Abkari Adhikari is genuine one. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the case against the applicant is that he got issued FDR No. 740045110006638 and the same was alleged to be fake in the first information report lodged against the applicant whereas, as per the instructions placed by counsel for the State, it is reported that the FDR is issued by the bank concerned and i.e. genuine one. This Court also taken note of the certificate issued by the bank concerned appended alongwith the supplementary affidavit that the FDR concerned is a genuine one. Further, there is no complaint that the applicant is absconding from the investigation proceedings and applicant is languishing in jail since 27.11.2024; the applicant has five cases criminal history which has been explained in paragraph no. 7 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant- Kuldeep Agarwal involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 12.2.2025 Mayank MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench