SANJAY SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO AND ANOTHER
NABAIL/1757/2025 · 2025-11-27
Karunesh Singh Pawar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 182191 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 182191 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1757 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1.The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.83 of 2025 under sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Tilonia, district Kheri. 2.Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Chandra Prakash Singh,
learned counsel for respondent No.2 who has filed vakalatnama which is taken on record, and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 3.Learned counsel for respondent No.2 who has filed instruction dated 30.10.2025 which is taken on record submits that the co-accused Sumit Kumar Verma has deposited the entire embezzled amount to the tune of Rs.15,65,140/-. In addition to that, interest upon the said amount has also been deposited. 4.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was posted as Chief Cane Officer/Acting General Manager of Sarju Sahkari Chini Mills Limited, Belrayan. The alleged cheque has been misused by the co- accused Sumit Kumar Verma. The accused applicant has already retired. He has no criminal antecedent. The offence is triable by Magistrate. The applicant has cooperated in the investigation which is evident from the
order dated 13.10.2025 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Lakhimpur Kheri who has passed strictures against the investigating Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashish Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Chandra Prakash Singh Sanjay Singh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And Another .....Opposite Party(s)
officer as he was found to be saving the main accused and in spite of the fact that the applicant was present in the court upon the order of the court with the investigating officer, he has given application that the applicant is not cooperating in the investigation. Due to the strictures passed on 13.10.2025, the applicant was being harassed by the investigating officer and due to that apprehension, he has filed the present anticipatory bail application. It is submitted that interim anticipatory bail application of the applicant was dismissed on the ground that it was the prosecution case that the applicant was served notice under section 179 BNSS treating him as a witness in the prosecution case and not as an accused. The applicant has been falsely implicated.
Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation. 5.Learned Addl. Government Advocate and complainant's counsel have opposed the prayer made by applicant's counsel. 6.Considering the above aspects of the matter, the fact that the applicant has no criminal history, the offences are triable by Magistrate, the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he will cooperate in the ongoing investigation, statement made by learned counsel for respondent No.2, the applicant is a retired government servant aged about 61 years, perusal of the record, as also the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant protection to the applicant. 7.In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer/S.H.O. The applicant shall report to the investigating officer within 20 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The investigating officer shall enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail, as directed above.
NABAIL No. 1757 of 2025 2
8.The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witnesses. The applicant shall not leave India sans previous permission of the Court. In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to proceed in accordance with law/ to move application for vacation of this
order. 9.The application is allowed accordingly. November 27, 2025 kkb/ NABAIL No. 1757 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench