Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:142033 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34574 of 2024 Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shaurya Sharma,Sweta Gaur Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Abhishek Tandon, learned Advocate holding brief of Ms. Sweta Gaur, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA-I for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 0062 of 2015, under Sections 409, 420, 120B IPC and Section 13(2) P.C. Act, Police Station Sangramgarh, District Pratapgarh during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, FIR of the present case was lodged on 06.05.2015 under Section 409 IPC against three accused (non applicant) and as per allegation the construction of Model Schools were being carried out by U.P. Nirman Nigam through a firm and it was found that nominated accused persons committed misappropriation of public fund. 4. He further submits, applicant was accountant in U.P. Nirman Nigam and after nine years from the date of the FIR he has been made accused in the present matter with the allegation that he along with other accused persons also committed the misappropriation. He further submits, entire allegation leveled against the applicant is totally false. 5. He further submits, FIR of the present case was lodged on 06.05.2015 with regard to constructions of Model Schools which were being carried out in the year 2013 and from Annexure-3 of the affidavit, it reflects, applicant became authorized signatory of the project on 26.11.2015 and this fact clearly suggests that applicant is innocent and on the basis of false allegation after nine years he has been made accused in the present matter. 6. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 25.07.2024 i.e. for last more than a year. 7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant was accountant in U.P. Nirman Nigam and he along with other public servants and private persons committed misappropriation of public fund which was in the tune of more than Rs. Two Crores but could not dispute the fact that in the present matter applicant has been made accused after nine years and there is allegation of misappropriation of public fund with regard to construction which was being carried out in the year 2013 and applicant became the authorized signatory of the project on 26.11.2015 i.e. even after lodgment of the FIR of the present case. 8. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 25.07.2024 i.e. for last more than a year. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. However, as per allegation, applicant being accountant in U.P. Nirman Nigam misappropriated more than Two Crores rupees of public fund along with other accused but it reflects, FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2015 dated 06.05.2015 and applicant was not named in the FIR and he has been made accused in the present matter after nine years i.e. in the year 2024. 11. Further, from the FIR it reflects, the same was lodged with regard to constructions of Two Model Schools relate to the year 2013 and from Annexure-3 of the affidavit it reflects, applicant became authorized signatory of the alleged project on 26.11.2015 i.e. even after lodgment of the FIR of the present case. 12. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 25.07.2024 i.e. for last more than a year and apart from the present case applicant is not having any criminal history. 13. Further, law is settled that unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and bail application should not be dismissed for punitive purpose. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 16. Let the applicant - Rajesh Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 17. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 18. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 20.8.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad