✦ High Court of India · 09 Oct 2025

State of U.P. vs Party(s)

Case Details High Court of India · 09 Oct 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
09 Oct 2025
Length
1,072 words

"Heard, Shri Sanjai Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Aniruddh Singh learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. and perused the record. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.549 of 2019, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34 I.P.C, Police Station-Hazratganj, District-Lucknow, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case, he is having no previous criminal history and in jail since 06.12.2019. It is further submitted on behalf of applicant that the applicant is running M/S Media Logics, Lucknow and he participated in the proceedings for tender for providing and managing the LED Van which were required to run for the advertisement by the State Government under the Scheme run by Jan Suchna Vibhag. The work was allotted to the applicant but no work was done. In the meantime, on the complaint, a fact finding inquiry was conducted that the number of firms are not working in the field but only giving fake number of vehicle trying to take the payment, as a result, under the order of State Government, the FIR No.549 of 2019, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34 I.P.C, Police Station- Hazratganj, District-Lucknow was lodged on 07.11.2019. He further submitted that a report was sent by the Director Information on 14.11.2018 apprising the facts to the State Government. He further submitted that co-accused Atul 2 BAIL No. 19 of 2020 Kumar Shukla who has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated

19.12.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12450 of 2019. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but has fairly conceded that co-accused Atul Kumar Shukla has been granted bail by this Court. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record as well as totality of facts and circumstances, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Let applicant -Anubhav Bhalla- be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime, on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (1) Applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail. (2) Applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court. (3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail. It is evident from the record that under the Government Scheme, a number of vehicles are being engaged by the State Government for proper advertisement of the schemes run by the State Government but during the fact finding inquiry and by making verification from the M-Privahan Apps, it came to notice that vehicle No. U.P. 32 CT 4688 is Motorcycle, U.P. 32 FQ 5478 is Maruti Wagon Car and U.P. 32 FN 6460 is registered dumper in the name of U.P. State Bridge Corporation. Similarly so many vehicles are registered as advertising van but registered as Motorcycle, Scooter, Moped etc. In pursuance of the order dated 06.01.2020, Shri Han Raj, Deputy Director, LED, Information Department is present and informed that it is obligatory on 3 BAIL No. 19 of 2020 the part of District Information Officer to inspect the LED van to verify and submit a report on day to day basis. Therefore, the District Information Officer of the concerned Districts are accountable in case any irregularity is found and in the present case, it is found that during the course of facts finding inquiry a number of LED Video Van have been shown as running but onpaper all these vehicle were found as Motorcycle, Scooter, Moped etc. In such circumstances, the accountability of Government Officer cannot be overlooked. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court cannot shut the eyes. Thus, the Director Vigilance U.P. is directed to take over the investigation of Case Crime No.549 of 2019, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34 I.P.C, Police Station-Hazratganj, District-Lucknow, forthwith. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Lucknow is directed to provide all the documents and case diary of Case Crime No.549 of 2019 (supra) to the office of Director Vigilance. The Director Vigilance, U.P. is further directed to depute some senior officer not below the rank of Superintendent of Police to monitor the investigation on day to day basis and submit a compliance report by the next date of listing. List this case on 31.01.2020 for further order. The Senior Registrar of this Court is directed to communicate this order to Principal Secretary (Home), Government of U.P., Director Vigilance (Establishment) U.P. and Senior Superintendent of Police, Lucknow for compliance. " At the time of disposal of the bail application direction was issued to the Director Vigilance, U.P. for conducting some inquiry. As the affidavit is also filed by Mr. Ram Kishun, Superintendent of Police, U.P. Vigilance Establishment annexing a report dated 06.8.2021 and informed that after inquiry the report has already been submitted to the State Government on 25.01.2021. Considering the contents of the affidavit filed by the aforesaid officer as the bail application is already disposed of therefore the record be consigned to office. October 9, 2025 (Rajeev Singh,J.) MANISH SAXENA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

"Heard, Shri Sanjai Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Aniruddh Singh learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. and perused the record. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.549 of 2019, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34 I.P.C, Police Station-Hazratganj, District-Lucknow, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case, he is having no previous criminal history and in jail since 06.12.2019. It is further submitted on behalf of applicant that the applicant is running M/S Media Logics, Lucknow and he participated in the proceedings for tender for providing and managing the LED Van which were required to run for the advertisement by the State Government under the Scheme run by Jan Suchna Vibhag. The work was allotted to the applicant but no work was done. In the meantime, on the complaint, a fact finding inquiry was conducted that the number of firms are not working in the field but only giving fake number of vehicle trying to take the payment, as a result, under the order of State Government, the FIR No.549 of 2019, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34 I.P.C, Police Station- Hazratganj, District-Lucknow was lodged on 07.11.2019. He further submitted that a report was sent by the Director Information on 14.11.2018 apprising the facts to the State Government. He further submitted that co-accused Atul 2 BAIL No. 19 of 2020 Kumar Shukla who has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated

19.12.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12450 of 2019. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but has fairly conceded that co-accused Atul Kumar Shukla has been granted bail by this Court. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record as well as totality of facts and circumstances, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Let applicant -Anubhav Bhalla- be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime, on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (1) Applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail. (2) Applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court. (3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail. It is evident from the record that under the Government Scheme, a number of vehicles are being engaged by the State Government for proper advertisement of the schemes run by the State Government but during the fact finding inquiry and by making verification from the M-Privahan Apps, it came to notice that vehicle No. U.P. 32 CT 4688 is Motorcycle, U.P. 32 FQ 5478 is Maruti Wagon Car and U.P. 32 FN 6460 is registered dumper in the name of U.P. State Bridge Corporation. Similarly so many vehicles are registered as advertising van but registered as Motorcycle, Scooter, Moped etc. In pursuance of the order dated 06.01.2020, Shri Han Raj, Deputy Director, LED, Information Department is present and informed that it is obligatory on 3 BAIL No. 19 of 2020 the part of District Information Officer to inspect the LED van to verify and submit a report on day to day basis. Therefore, the District Information Officer of the concerned Districts are accountable in case any irregularity is found and in the present case, it is found that during the course of facts finding inquiry a number of LED Video Van have been shown as running but onpaper all these vehicle were found as Motorcycle, Scooter, Moped etc. In such circumstances, the accountability of Government Officer cannot be overlooked. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court cannot shut the eyes. Thus, the Director Vigilance U.P. is directed to take over the investigation of Case Crime No.549 of 2019, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34 I.P.C, Police Station-Hazratganj, District-Lucknow, forthwith. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Lucknow is directed to provide all the documents and case diary of Case Crime No.549 of 2019 (supra) to the office of Director Vigilance. The Director Vigilance, U.P. is further directed to depute some senior officer not below the rank of Superintendent of Police to monitor the investigation on day to day basis and submit a compliance report by the next date of listing. List this case on 31.01.2020 for further order. The Senior Registrar of this Court is directed to communicate this order to Principal Secretary (Home), Government of U.P., Director Vigilance (Establishment) U.P. and Senior Superintendent of Police, Lucknow for compliance. " At the time of disposal of the bail application direction was issued to the Director Vigilance, U.P. for conducting some inquiry. As the affidavit is also filed by Mr. Ram Kishun, Superintendent of Police, U.P. Vigilance Establishment annexing a report dated 06.8.2021 and informed that after inquiry the report has already been submitted to the State Government on 25.01.2021. Considering the contents of the affidavit filed by the aforesaid officer as the bail application is already disposed of therefore the record be consigned to office. October 9, 2025 (Rajeev Singh,J.) MANISH SAXENA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments