Allahabad High Court Bail Order: Adish Kumar Sharma v State of UP Through CBI Lucknow
In Adish Kumar Sharma v State of Uttar Pradesh CBI Lucknow, the Allahabad High Court delivered an important Allahabad High Court bail order CBI case concerning regular bail under Section 120-B and Section 409 IPC bail alongside charges under Prevention of Corruption Act Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c). The applicant, who served as Godown In-charge at block Hargaon, was granted bail after the Court evaluated the completion of investigation, submission of the charge-sheet, absence of criminal antecedents, and pre-trial detention duration. For legal context on property statutes, see Real Estate Law, and for state criminal proceedings, review Mahesh Mani Pandey v State of Uttar Pradesh and another.
Factual Background and Case Registration (RC No. 0062010A0011)
The prosecution originated from investigations conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti-Corruption Branch (CBI/ACB), Lucknow, registered as Regular Case (RC) No. 0062010A0011. The prosecution alleged widespread irregularities in the distribution of subsidized foodgrains intended for Below Poverty Line (BPL) beneficiaries under governmental welfare schemes in District Sitapur, Uttar Pradesh.
Statutory Charges Under the Indian Penal Code and Prevention of Corruption Act
The accused was arraigned under multiple penal provisions:
- Section 120-B IPC: Criminal conspiracy entered into between public servants and distribution officials to divert subsidized commodities.
- Section 409 IPC: Criminal breach of trust by a public servant entrusted with government property and food stock.
- Sections 466 and 471 IPC: Forgery of public registers and fraudulent use of forged documents as genuine records.
- Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988: Criminal misconduct by a public servant through fraudulent misappropriation of entrusted public property.
Allegations in the Hargaon Block Godown Foodgrain Subsidy Case
The core allegation in this Hargaon block godown foodgrain subsidy case was that the applicant, during his tenure as Godown In-charge at block Hargaon, falsely recorded the issuance of 476.40 quintals of wheat and 82.80 quintals of rice in the official issue register. The CBI asserted that these entries caused a direct financial loss in government subsidy amounting to Rs. 2,73,114.08, further alleging that Supply Inspector Umesh Chandra Shukla had certified the bogus issue of foodgrains.
Submissions on Behalf of the Accused Applicant
Learned counsel representing the applicant argued that the primary allegation against Adish Kumar Sharma in the charge-sheet was confined to criminal conspiracy. It was submitted that the applicant had released the foodgrain stock strictly on the basis of official verification and certification made by Supply Inspector Umesh Chandra Shukla. The applicant had been in judicial custody since May 23, 2013, possessed no previous criminal record as affirmed in paragraphs 3 and 38 of the supporting affidavit, and the investigation stood fully concluded with the filing of the final charge-sheet.
Objections Raised by the Central Bureau of Investigation
Mr. Bireshwar Nath, learned counsel appearing for the CBI, strongly opposed the bail prayer. The prosecution contended that the offenses involved grave economic harm, as the applicant had fraudulently shown the issuance of subsidized foodgrains without actual physical distribution to eligible beneficiaries, directly subverting a vital public distribution program.
Judicial Reasoning and Order Granting Bail
Justice Shabihul Hasnain of the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, considered the rival submissions of both parties and perused the case records. Without expressing any conclusive opinion on the underlying merits of the prosecution case, the Court observed that since the investigation was complete, the charge-sheet was on record, and the applicant had undergone prolonged custody without prior criminal history, it was a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.
Mandatory Bail Conditions and Trial Compliance Directives
The Court ordered that the applicant, Adish Kumar Sharma, be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned, subject to strict compliance conditions:
- The applicant shall not tamper with prosecution evidence or influence witnesses in any manner.
- The applicant shall report to the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) concerned during the first week of each calendar month to demonstrate good conduct until the conclusion of trial.
- Any default in adhering to the prescribed conditions shall result in automatic cancellation of bail and immediate remand into custody.
Full Text of the Allahabad High Court Bail Order
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, BENCH AT LUCKNOW
Court No. 6
Bail No. 5735 of 2013
Adish Kumar Sharma ... Applicant (In Jail)
Versus
State of U.P. Through C.B.I., Lucknow ... Opposite Party
Hon'ble Shabihul Hasnain, J.
Order dated 11 November 2013:
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Bireshwar Nath, learned counsel for C.B.I. and perused the record.
2. This bail application has been preferred by the accused-applicant, Adish Kumar Sharma, who is involved in R.C. No. 0062010A0011, under Sections 120-B, 409, 466, 471 I.P.C. & Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, P.S.- CBI/ACB, Lucknow, District-Lucknow.
3. The allegation against the applicant is that he was Godown In-charge block Hargaon at the relevant time and he has falsely shown issue of 476.40 quintal of wheat and 82.80 quintal of rice in the issue register of block Godown causing loss of subsidy to the Government to the tune of Rs.2,73,114.08. The supply Inspector Umesh Chandra had certified the bogus issue of foodgrains of BPL in the issue register.
4. Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that as per charge-sheet the allegation against the applicant is of criminal conspiracy only. He only released the foodgrains on the basis of verification made by Supply Inspector Umesh Chandra Shukla. Applicant is in jail since 23.5.2013 with no criminal record as alleged in paragraph nos. 3 and 38 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application. The charge-sheet has already been submitted. No useful purpose would be served in keeping the applicant in custody. Request for bail was made.
5. Mr. Bireshwar Nath, learned counsel for C.B.I. opposed the contention and submitted that involvement of the applicant is very serious in nature as without issuing any foodgrain he fraudulently showed it issued. The bail is opposed.
6. Considering the submissions made by both the parties and going through the record, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
7. Let applicant, Adish Kumar Sharma, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.
That the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence.
That he shall report to the court of C.J.M. concerned in the first week of each month to show his good conduct and behaviour till conclusion of the trial.
8. In case of default of any of the above mentioned conditions, the bail granted to the applicant shall be deemed cancelled and he shall be taken into custody forthwith.
Order accordingly.