High Court · 2025

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No. 431 of 2022, under Section 7/13 of Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Mahoba. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 14.03.2023, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "Heard Shri Shiv S.E. Chitambar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present anticipatory bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Pancham Singh in Case Crime No. 431/2022, under Section 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Mahoba, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as he is apprehending arrest in the above- mentioned case. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while referring to the First Information Report and the copy of the inquiry report on the basis of which First Information Report has been lodged, vehemently submits that even if the inquiry report on the basis of which First Information Report has been lodged is taken on its face, it would emerge that certain discrepancies have been found in the developmental work done by the 'Gram Panchayat' which at the relevant point of time was headed by the instant applicant who was the Pradhan of the 'Gram Panchayat'. It is vehemently submitted that the inquiry pertaining to the certain allegations of financial embezzlement has been done by the Sub Divisional Magistrate Kulpahar as well as by the Assistant Engineer, P.W.D. 'Mahoba' and it is only on the basis of the statements of the certain persons, who at the relevant point of time were present on the spot, the report has been submitted. The inquiry report on the basis of which First Information Report was lodged is silent on the point as to why the J.E. who had prepared the measurement book and who at the relevant point of time was supervising the developmental work and the Panchayat Secretary who was cosignatory in making payments were not held responsible along with the instant applicant as the cheque could only be drawn by the signature of Pradhan as well as of the Panchayat Secretary and it transpires that the report on the basis of which First Information Report has been lodged is biased. It is next submitted that the applicant is a respectable person in the locality and having roots in the society and is a law abiding citizen and he is not having any criminal history and there is no apprehension that after being granted the facility of anticipatory bail, he may flee from the course of law or otherwise misuse the liberty and he undertakes that he will cooperate in the investigation. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that it was after thorough inquiry done by the Assistant Engineer concerned certain financial irregularities and misappropriation of the public money has been found and on the basis of that report the First Information Report has been lodged. Thus the applicant is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that on the basis of inquiry report allegedly prepared by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kulpahar and Assistant Engineer, P.W.D. Mahoba with regard to the certain discrepancies found in the developmental work done by the Village Panchyat which was headed by the Pradhan of the Village Panchayat, the FIR has been lodged. Various submissions have been made by learned counsel for applicant with regard to the serious discrepancies appearing in the inquiry report which is the basis of lodging the First Information Report. It is also submitted that the Junior Engineer who has at first certified the work and prepared M.B. and the Panchayat Secretary who was co-signatory of the cheques and under whose signature payment has been made, have not been arrayed as accused in the inquiry report. It is also submitted that the applicant will remain present before the Investigating Officer as and when his presence would be required and would cooperate in the investigation. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and the facts and circumstances of the case in totality and keeping in view the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs. State of Punjab [(1980) 2 SCC 565 : 1980 SCC (Cri) 561], Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra (2011) 1 SCC 694 as well as in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2020) 5 SCC 1 and in Nathu Singh Vs State of U.P. and Others, 2021(6) SCC 64, MANU/SC/0360/2021, I am of the consider view that interim protection may be granted to the instant applicant. Notice on behalf of opposite party no.2 has also been received by the office of the Government Advocate, thus a detailed counter affidavit may be filed by the State till the next date of listing, keeping in view the inquiry report prepared by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kulpahar and Assistant Engineer, P.W.D., Mahoba within three weeks from today. List this case on 6.4.2023. It is provided that till the next date of listing in the event of arrest of the applicant- Pancham Singh involved in the above noted case, he shall be released on anticipatory bail forthwith on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/ Investigating Officer / trial court concerned subject to the following conditions. (1) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation or for discovery of any fact by Investigating Officer as and when required; (2) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (3) The applicant shall not leave the District concerned without the previous permission of the Court. (4) The applicant shall not indulge himself in any criminal activity. List as directed on 6.4.2023, on which date, this application shall be decided finally." From perusal of the order dated 14.03.2023, it transpires that the State counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thoroughly considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceeding or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Pancham Singh till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (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 the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. Order Date :- 5.2.2025 kkv/ KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No. 431 of 2022, under Section 7/13 of Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Mahoba. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 14.03.2023, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "Heard Shri Shiv S.E. Chitambar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present anticipatory bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Pancham Singh in Case Crime No. 431/2022, under Section 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Mahoba, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as he is apprehending arrest in the above- mentioned case. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while referring to the First Information Report and the copy of the inquiry report on the basis of which First Information Report has been lodged, vehemently submits that even if the inquiry report on the basis of which First Information Report has been lodged is taken on its face, it would emerge that certain discrepancies have been found in the developmental work done by the 'Gram Panchayat' which at the relevant point of time was headed by the instant applicant who was the Pradhan of the 'Gram Panchayat'. It is vehemently submitted that the inquiry pertaining to the certain allegations of financial embezzlement has been done by the Sub Divisional Magistrate Kulpahar as well as by the Assistant Engineer, P.W.D. 'Mahoba' and it is only on the basis of the statements of the certain persons, who at the relevant point of time were present on the spot, the report has been submitted. The inquiry report on the basis of which First Information Report was lodged is silent on the point as to why the J.E. who had prepared the measurement book and who at the relevant point of time was supervising the developmental work and the Panchayat Secretary who was cosignatory in making payments were not held responsible along with the instant applicant as the cheque could only be drawn by the signature of Pradhan as well as of the Panchayat Secretary and it transpires that the report on the basis of which First Information Report has been lodged is biased. It is next submitted that the applicant is a respectable person in the locality and having roots in the society and is a law abiding citizen and he is not having any criminal history and there is no apprehension that after being granted the facility of anticipatory bail, he may flee from the course of law or otherwise misuse the liberty and he undertakes that he will cooperate in the investigation. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that it was after thorough inquiry done by the Assistant Engineer concerned certain financial irregularities and misappropriation of the public money has been found and on the basis of that report the First Information Report has been lodged. Thus the applicant is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that on the basis of inquiry report allegedly prepared by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kulpahar and Assistant Engineer, P.W.D. Mahoba with regard to the certain discrepancies found in the developmental work done by the Village Panchyat which was headed by the Pradhan of the Village Panchayat, the FIR has been lodged. Various submissions have been made by learned counsel for applicant with regard to the serious discrepancies appearing in the inquiry report which is the basis of lodging the First Information Report. It is also submitted that the Junior Engineer who has at first certified the work and prepared M.B. and the Panchayat Secretary who was co-signatory of the cheques and under whose signature payment has been made, have not been arrayed as accused in the inquiry report. It is also submitted that the applicant will remain present before the Investigating Officer as and when his presence would be required and would cooperate in the investigation. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and the facts and circumstances of the case in totality and keeping in view the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs. State of Punjab [(1980) 2 SCC 565 : 1980 SCC (Cri) 561], Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra (2011) 1 SCC 694 as well as in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2020) 5 SCC 1 and in Nathu Singh Vs State of U.P. and Others, 2021(6) SCC 64, MANU/SC/0360/2021, I am of the consider view that interim protection may be granted to the instant applicant. Notice on behalf of opposite party no.2 has also been received by the office of the Government Advocate, thus a detailed counter affidavit may be filed by the State till the next date of listing, keeping in view the inquiry report prepared by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kulpahar and Assistant Engineer, P.W.D., Mahoba within three weeks from today. List this case on 6.4.2023. It is provided that till the next date of listing in the event of arrest of the applicant- Pancham Singh involved in the above noted case, he shall be released on anticipatory bail forthwith on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/ Investigating Officer / trial court concerned subject to the following conditions. (1) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation or for discovery of any fact by Investigating Officer as and when required; (2) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (3) The applicant shall not leave the District concerned without the previous permission of the Court. (4) The applicant shall not indulge himself in any criminal activity. List as directed on 6.4.2023, on which date, this application shall be decided finally." From perusal of the order dated 14.03.2023, it transpires that the State counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thoroughly considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceeding or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Pancham Singh till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (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 the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. Order Date :- 5.2.2025 kkv/ KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench