Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:9106
Court No. - 15
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL
APPLICATION No. - 14490 of 2023
Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Srivastava
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.
Home Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar
Yadav,Anoop Vajpayee
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the accused-
applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State
and perused the record.
Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State and
rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the
application are taken on record.
2. This bail application has been moved by the
accused/applicant- Vinod Kumar Srivastava for
grant of bail in Case Crime No.0276 of 2021,
under Section 409 IPC, lodged at Police Station
Rajesultanpur, District Ambedkar Nagar, during
trial.
3. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant,
while pressing the bail application, submits that
the applicant has been falsely implicated in this
case and, he has not committed any offence, as
claimed by the prosecution. The FIR of this case
has been lodged against 16 named accused
persons, including the applicant, showing him as
assistant project manager, with allegations that
the state government has sanctioned many
construction works to be carried out in district
Ambedkar Nagar by U.P. Projects Corporation
Limited by means of different government orders
of dates 16.05.2008, 09.02.2009, 28.02.2011,
31.03.2015 and 25.05.2016, however, on
inspection of these works it was found that some
work had not been completed while the money
which was sanctioned for completion of this
project had been fully exhausted. The applicant
amongst others, who was working as assistant
project manager, has been found liable for such
misappropriation.
4. It is vehemently submitted that the
discrepancies which have been found in the
inquiry report may not be deemed to be
conclusive, moreover, the applicant was not an
appropriate authority who could withdraw the
amount as the amount could only be withdrawn
under the signatures of other authorities. It is
further submitted that the applicant has retired on
superannuation on 31.10.2019, while the FIR of
the instant case has been lodged on 24.12.2021. It
is further submitted that the inquiry which was
conducted for the purpose of lodging of the FIR
has given a complete go-by to the natural
phenomenon of escalation of rates as the projects
which were to be completed within certain time
duration have delayed and the cost of the project
is thus bound to increase having regard to
increase in price of the raw-material and other
infrastructure required for the completion of these
projects and these aspects of the matter have not
been considered by the authority who has
directed to lodge the FIR against the applicant
and other accused persons. It is also submitted
that seven identical FIRs have been lodged
against the applicant and out of these seven FIRs,
in six cases the applicant has been granted bail by
the coordinate Benches of this Court and the bail
orders with regard to these six cases have been
placed on record from pages 63 to 74 of the
paper-book. It is also submitted that one more
case bearing fir/case crime no.0108 of 2020 was
shown as the criminal history of the applicant,
however, final report has been submitted with
regard to that case. The applicant is languishing
in jail in this case since 28.04.2023 and he is not
having any other criminal history except those
explained above. There is no apprehension that
after being released on bail, the applicant may
flee from the course of law or may otherwise
misuse the liberty.
5. Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer
of bail of the applicant on the ground that the
applicant has committed a heinous offence and
much amount of public exchequer has been
misappropriated and, therefore, he is not entitled
to be released on bail.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties
and having perused the record, it appears to be an
admitted case that the works in question were
sanctioned by different government orders issued
in between the years 2008 and 2016. The FIR of
the instant case could only be lodged on
24.12.2021. The defence of the applicant appears
to be that the escalation in price, raw-material
and other infrastructure has not been considered
by the inquiry authority on the recommendation
of which the FIR has been lodged as the cost of
the project is bound to increase due to inflation
and other aspects connected with the construction
works. In six cases of identical nature the
applicant has been enlarged on bail by the
coordinate Benches of this Court and the in
seventh case final/closure report is stated to have
been submitted. The applicant is languishing in
jail in this case since 28.04.2023 and his presence
of the applicant may be secured before the trial
court by placing adequate conditions.
7. Keeping in view the nature of the offence,
evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of
punishment, submissions of the learned counsel
for the parties and without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the
considered view that applicant has made out a
case for bail. The bail application is thus allowed.
8. Let the accused/applicant- Vinod Kumar
Srivastava, involved in above-mentioned case,
be released on bail on his furnishing a personal
bond with two sureties in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the court concerned subject to
following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence by
intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during
the investigation or trial.
(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial
sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any
criminal activity or commission of any crime
after being released on bail.
9. In case of breach of any of the above
conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of
bail.
10. Identity, status and residence proof of the
applicant and sureties be verified by the Court
concerned before the bonds are accepted.
11. Observations made herein-above by this court
are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail
application and shall not be construed as an
expression on the merits of the case.
Order Date :- 31.1.2024
MVS/-
Digitally signed by :-
MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad,
Lucknow Bench