Allahabad High Court
PREM PRAKASH BHARTI ALIAS PREM PRAKASHversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Prem Prakash Bharti, who was accused under Section 316(5) BNS for alleged misappropriation of paddy procurement funds while serving as In‑charge of a Paddy Procurement Center. The applicant contended that the allegations were false, that he had submitted detailed transaction records, and that the matter was essentially an accounting dispute with no prima facie criminal offence. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the factual contentions raised by the applicant. The Court noted the applicant's prior criminal history but found it explained in the bail petition and observed that the offences were triable by a Magistrate and the applicant had been in custody for over nine months. Consequently, the Court held that the applicant was entitled to bail, subject to a personal bond, sureties, and standard conditions, without expressing any view on the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case of alleged misappropriation of public funds related to paddy procurement.
- Whether the applicant's prior criminal history justifies denial of bail.
- Whether the alleged conduct constitutes a criminal offence or merely an accounting discrepancy.
Legislation cited
- Section 316(5) BNS
Subjects
- bail
- misappropriation
- public funds
- accounting dispute
- criminal history
- magistrate trial
- conditions of bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35701 of 2025
Prem Prakash Bharti Alias Prem Prakash
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ambuj Pandey, Anurag Vajpeyi, Smita
Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Heard Sri Anurag Vajpeyi, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S.B.
Maurya, 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. 83 of 2025, under Sections 316(5) BNS, Police
Station Kishanpur, District Fatehpur during pendency of the trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant was Incharge of
Paddy Procurement Center and as per allegation he failed to provide the
details of the paddy after taking the same from the farmers and giving it to
the Millers but entire allegation leveled against applicant is totally false.
4. He further submits, applicant provided complete details of the transactions
through an application dated 06.05.2025, which has been annexed at page-85
of the paper-book. He further submits, even at this stage it cannot be said
that applicant misappropriated any public money and prima facie it appears
to be a case of issue of accounting and prima facie no criminal offence is
made out against the applicant.
5. He further submits, even without giving any show cause notice to the
applicant directly he has been made accused in the present matter and till
date no departmental inquiry has been conducted against him.
6. He further submits, however, apart from the present case applicant is
having criminal history of two other cases but his criminal history has been
explained in the bail application and in one case applicant has been
BAIL No. 35701 of 2025
2
exonerated and in one another case compromise has been executed between
the parties.
7. He further submits, even all the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate
and in the present matter applicant is in jail since 09.07.2025 i.e. for last
more than nine months.
8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute
the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the
case.
10. However, as per allegation, applicant misappropriated the public fund
relating to paddy but considering the facts of the case, the argument
advanced by learned counsel for applicant that prima facie it appears to be a
case of issue of accounting relating to paddy cannot be ruled out.
11. Further, however, apart from the present case applicant is having
criminal history of two cases but his criminal history has been explained in
the instant bail application.
12. Further, all the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate and in the
present matter applicant is in jail since 09.07.2025 i.e. for last more than
nine months.
13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed
above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
the instant bail application is allowed.
15. Let the applicant - Prem Prakash Bharti @ Prem Prakash 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
BAIL No. 35701 of 2025
3
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.
16. 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.
17. 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.
April 23, 2026
AK Pandey
(Sameer Jain,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…