Back
OM PRAKASH VII
Satendra Kumar Antil – Appellant
Versus
C. B. I. – Respondent
Based on the provided legal document, the court has concluded that the anticipatory bail application filed by Satendra Kumar Antil is not tenable. The court considered the nature of the allegations, the conduct of the applicant, and the ongoing process of investigation and legal proceedings. Despite the applicant's cooperation and assertions that the allegations are false, the court noted that he has not appeared before the court despite multiple warrants being issued against him. Furthermore, the court observed that the applicant's role in the alleged criminal conspiracy and the recovery of a substantial amount of bribe money from co-accused persons raised concerns about the likelihood of his flight or misuse of liberty if granted anticipatory bail. Consequently, the court rejected the application, emphasizing the importance of court proceedings and the need to ensure the applicant's presence and cooperation in the ongoing investigation and trial.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Anurag Khanna, learned senior advocate assisted by Sri Sanjay Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Gyan Prakash, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the C.B.I. through video conferencing. Present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Satendra Kumar Antil in R.C. No.1202020A0003 under section 120-B IPC and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station - C.B.I. (ACB), District Ghaziabad.
2. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant was posted as Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner at Regional Office EPFO, Noida. Allegations levelled against him are false. He was not arrested on the spot. Nothing was recovered from his possession to connect him with the present matter. Applicant has always made himself available to the Investigating Officer for interrogation. Thus, he fully cooperated with the investigating agency. Recovery is against co-accused, who has been allowed on regular bail. No fruitful purpose will be served directing the applicant to surrender before the court concern
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
