Rishabh Agarwal v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48635 of 2023 Applicant :- Rishabh Agarwal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Tripathi,Utkarsh Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Supplementary affidavit, filed by the counsel for the applicant, is taken on record.

¶2Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶3The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 190 of 2023, under Sections 204, 406, 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District-Etah during pendency of the trial.

¶4Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused Ravi in police custody. The said statement, insofar as it implicates the applicant, is unreliable. The applicant is an employee of the alleged bank. No amount has been transferred from the bank account of informant Ravi to the account of the applicant. The applicant had no role in the alleged transaction. It is next contended that the CCTV footage of the incident is available with the investigating officer and the applicant was not seen around the cash counter at the relevant time. Prior to the instant case the applicant does not have any criminal history, however after his arrest he has been implicated in another case. The applicant is in jail since 4.9.2023. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶5Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶6Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. The name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused Ravi in police custody. At this stage there is no substantive evidence against the applicant. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for more than two months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶7Let the applicant, Rishabh Agarwal involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶8In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 1.12.2023 S.S. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad