High Court · 2025

1. Heard Sri Pranjal Krishna, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Aakash Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the C.B.I.

2. Sri Aakash Prasad, learned counsel has filed counter affidavit, same is taken on record.

3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Nagendra Kumar Verma) is languishing in jail since 05.03.2025 in FIR/Crime No.RC0062025A0007, under Sections 61(2) r/w 112, 316(5) of B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 7, 7A & 8 of P.C. Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018), Police Station- CBI/ACB/Lucknow, District-Lucknow. He has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant is a candidate, who was to appear in a departmental promotion exam relating to engine drivers. These engine drivers are known as 'Loco Pilots' and consequent to fulfilling to criteria would be eligible to write the examination of Chief Loco Inspector (CLI). The exam in question related to East Central Railways (ECR) divisional headquarter of which are at Deen Dayal Upadhayay Nagar (formerly Mughal Sarai) Uttar Pradesh.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that charge-sheet has been filed under the above mentioned sections wherein the maximum punishment is 7 years except Section 316 B.N.S. wherein maximum punishment is up to ten years or life imprisonment as the case may be. Since, it was department examination for making promotion so the applicant was admittedly discharging his duty of Loco Pilot. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Since, he is a government employee therefore there is no question of flee from the trial proceeding and he is having his permanent official address as well as permanent residential address, so if, he is enlarged on bail, he shall participate in the trial proceeding and shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

6. Per contra Sri Aakash Prasad has vehemently opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that after making thorough investigation, the CBI collected the credible evidences against the present applicant and the present applicant was the beneficiary to the effect that he would have been promoted on the promotional post, if the CBI had not come into picture after receiving the specific information of aforesaid forgery from reliable sources. So as to obtain the promotional post, the present applicant has paid the amount as per the demand of senior officials, who are the main culprit in the present case, therefore Sri Prasad has stated that the present bail application be rejected.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that the present applicant is a candidate, who was to appear in a departmental promotion exam relating to engine drivers, the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever, chargesheet has been filed; since, the applicant is a government employee therefore there is no question of flee from the trial proceeding and he is having his permanent official address as well as permanent residential address and the undertaking that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.

8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant (Nagendra Kumar Verma) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer to cooperate in the investigation and shall further remain present to cooperate in the investigation as and when the Investigating Team calls him to appear and if the charge-sheet is filed against him he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly and shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant 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 IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) 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./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) 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./351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. The present applicants shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. Order Date :- 24.7.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard Sri Pranjal Krishna, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Aakash Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the C.B.I.

2. Sri Aakash Prasad, learned counsel has filed counter affidavit, same is taken on record.

3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Nagendra Kumar Verma) is languishing in jail since 05.03.2025 in FIR/Crime No.RC0062025A0007, under Sections 61(2) r/w 112, 316(5) of B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 7, 7A & 8 of P.C. Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018), Police Station- CBI/ACB/Lucknow, District-Lucknow. He has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant is a candidate, who was to appear in a departmental promotion exam relating to engine drivers. These engine drivers are known as 'Loco Pilots' and consequent to fulfilling to criteria would be eligible to write the examination of Chief Loco Inspector (CLI). The exam in question related to East Central Railways (ECR) divisional headquarter of which are at Deen Dayal Upadhayay Nagar (formerly Mughal Sarai) Uttar Pradesh.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that charge-sheet has been filed under the above mentioned sections wherein the maximum punishment is 7 years except Section 316 B.N.S. wherein maximum punishment is up to ten years or life imprisonment as the case may be. Since, it was department examination for making promotion so the applicant was admittedly discharging his duty of Loco Pilot. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Since, he is a government employee therefore there is no question of flee from the trial proceeding and he is having his permanent official address as well as permanent residential address, so if, he is enlarged on bail, he shall participate in the trial proceeding and shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

6. Per contra Sri Aakash Prasad has vehemently opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that after making thorough investigation, the CBI collected the credible evidences against the present applicant and the present applicant was the beneficiary to the effect that he would have been promoted on the promotional post, if the CBI had not come into picture after receiving the specific information of aforesaid forgery from reliable sources. So as to obtain the promotional post, the present applicant has paid the amount as per the demand of senior officials, who are the main culprit in the present case, therefore Sri Prasad has stated that the present bail application be rejected.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that the present applicant is a candidate, who was to appear in a departmental promotion exam relating to engine drivers, the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever, chargesheet has been filed; since, the applicant is a government employee therefore there is no question of flee from the trial proceeding and he is having his permanent official address as well as permanent residential address and the undertaking that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.

8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant (Nagendra Kumar Verma) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer to cooperate in the investigation and shall further remain present to cooperate in the investigation as and when the Investigating Team calls him to appear and if the charge-sheet is filed against him he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly and shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant 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 IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) 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./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) 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./351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. The present applicants shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. Order Date :- 24.7.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench