Ramanand Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12772 of 2023 Applicant :- Ramanand Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Ashish Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶3The present application for anticipatory bail has been filed for anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.424 of 2023, under Sections 420, 409 I.P.C., Police Station Kothibhar, District Maharajganj, during the pendency of trial.

¶4As per prosecution story, the applicant is the ex-Village Pradhan of the concerned Gram Panchayat. The applicant alognwith other co-accused persons is stated to have usurped an amount of Rs.2,80,000/- in the name of construction of cow shed. A recovery certificate of Rs.93,000/- was issued against the applicant.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The said persons, who are stated to be aggrieved that animals shed have not been made by the applicant, have filed affidavit indicating that the animals shed were constructed by the Gram Panchayat. Even the informant had filed affidavit indicating that he does not want to press the FIR. Learned counsel has further stated that a show cause notice was issued against the applicant by the District Magistrate and he had challenged it by filing writ petition before this Court.

¶6Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the criminal history of two cases assigned to the applicant has been explained as he has been acquitted in one case which has been filed as Annexure-7 to the affidavit and in one case FIR was instituted on 13.6.2023 and the investigation is going on, as such, he has not applied for bail in it. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length.

¶7Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that the instant FIR was instituted on 19.10.2023 and the FIR No.214 of 2023 was instituted on 13.6.2023 well before the present FIR, as such, the applicant has not explained his criminal antecedent.

¶8After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that applicant has caused loss to the State Exchequer coupled with the fact that the criminal history of the applicant has not been properly explained, I do not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶9The present anticipatory bail application is hereby found devoid of merits and is accordingly rejected.

¶10It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of anticipatory bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 22.11.2023 Vikas [Krishan Pahal, J.] High Court of Judicature at Allahabad