Allahabad High Court
Brij Bhushan Yadav [Anticipatory Bail] vs The State on 8 October, 2020
Author: Irshad Ali
Bench: Irshad Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?In Chamber Case :- BAIL No. - 7128 of 2020 Applicant :- Brij Bhushan Yadav [Anticipatory Bail] Opposite Party :- The State Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Narayan Pandey,Aprajita Tiwari,Sweta Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Irshad Ali,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the respondent State.
2. This is first bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in case crime No.10 of 2020 under section 120-B, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC registered at police station Ashiyana, Lucknow.
3. As per version of the F.I.R., the applicant was arrested by the Special Task Force while planning to appear in an examination conducted by UPSSSC for the post of Junior Assistant in place of original candidate as a solver.
4. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that in the alleged incident, the name of the applicant came into existence on the statement of co-accused. He further submitted that there is no possibility of fleeing away of the applicant and tempering with the witnesses. In case bail is granted to him, he will not misuse the liberty granted to him.
5. On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the bail and submitted that the fraud / offence committed by the applicant is serious in nature, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of interim protection and the application is liable to be dismissed.
6. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
7. On perusal, I am of the considered opinion that no case has been made out for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant and there is no merit in the case.
8. However, if the applicant surrenders before the court below within four weeks from today and move bail application, the same shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously in accordance with law and also keeping in view the directions contained in the judgement delivered by this court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. repored in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as by the Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) (Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.).
9. For four weeks or till the date of surrender, whichever is earlier, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicant.
10. With the aforesaid observation / direction, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 8.10.2020 Adarsh K Singh