Allahabad High Court
Gaurav Chaudhary vs State Of U.P. on 26 November, 2024
Author: Samit Gopal
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:184878 Court No. - 80 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41216 of 2024 Applicant :- Gaurav Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mahipal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
1. Heard Sri Mahipal Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Triveni Saran Rai, learned counsel for the State and perused the records.
2. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Gaurav Chaudhary, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 459 of 2024, under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 336(2), 340(2), 61(2) B.N.S., 2023 and Section 7 Prevention of Corruption Act, registered at P.S. Civil Lines, District Aligarh.
3. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 01.10.2024 by Inspector Sunil Kumar against the applicant and 16 other persons on the basis of a recovery memo alleging therein that on 30.09.2024 he accompanied with police personnels were in the area busy in their work where on at Tasveer Mahal Chauraha an informer met them and told them that some people are in the vehicles standing beneath Bhamola bridge who are to give forged marksheet to the students which is to be used in verification in the Village Postman and if they immediately go they will be apprehended. On this information, the informant with other police personnels went to the place and tried to collect public witness who refused and then raided the said three vehicles by surrounding them. The people sitting in the vehicles were found carrying papers. In an Alto Car having registration No. U.P.20 CP 6881 the person sitting on his driver seat disclosed his name as Gaurav Chaudhary (the applicant) who disclosed that wherever the marsheet used to be given he used to be taken and was given money. The other person were also inquired who disclosed their names as Abhishek Chaudhary, Priyankul Chaudhary, Hemant Kumar, Sumit Chaudhary, Aham Mishra, Vikal Yadav, Kashim, Suhail, Asif, Sajid Ali, Prashant Kumar, Sakib, Sonu, Deepak, Devendra Kumar Singh the Post Superintendent and Sanjay Kumar Singh the Post Superintendent. A total of 22 forged marsheets were recovered from them. The same were then sealed and sent for forensic in lab.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is a driver only. He was found sitting on the driver seat. It is submitted that no offence whatsoever has been committed by him. It is further submitted that there is no recovery of any incriminating material either from the possession or pointing out by the applicant. It is further submitted that from the possession of the applicant one mobile phone was recovered which is the mobile of the applicant himself. It is submitted that neither the applicant is the owner of the recovered car nor any alleged forged marksheet has been recovered from his possession, the co-accused Abhishek Chaudhary is the owner of the said car which was given to him, para 9 of the affidavit has been placed before the Court. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 17 of the affidavit and is in jail since 30.09.2024.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is one of the persons who were arrested along with other accused persons and were instrumental in giving forged marksheet to the students which was used for verification for the post of Village Postman. It is submitted that it cannot be said that the applicant was not involved of the gang, since he was arrested along with gang members and there were 22 marksheets recovered at the time of arrest. It is submitted that the gang was working effectively by providing forged marksheets to the students which was being used by them for verification to get employment as Village Postman. It is argued that there is no reason for false implication of the applicant and as such the prayer for bail of the applicant be rejected.
6. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant was arrested along with other co-accused persons and 22 marksheets were recovered. The work of the gang was to provide forged marksheets for verification for getting employment as Village Postman. There is no reason for false implication of the applicant in the present case, even no reason could be shown and pleaded in the petition. The entire gang being the applicant and other accused persons were involved in making the process of appointment done with the help of forged documents. The matter is serious in nature. I do not find it a fit case for bail.
7. Considering the totality of the case in particular, nature of evidence available on record, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.
8. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected.
Order Date :- 26.11.2024 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.)