Court No. - 73

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL

APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 17761 of 2021

Applicant :- Yogendra Kumar Jain @ Y.K. Jain

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Kumar Sreshtha,Sr. Advocate

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for

the State and perused the record.

2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory

bail in Case Crime no. 0121 of 2021, under Sections 409, 420

and 120-B IPC, P.S. Fazalganj, District Kanpur Nagar (South

Commissionerate), with the prayer that in the event of arrest,

applicant may be released on bail.

3. According to the prosecution, in JNNURM scheme of

Government, PAC pipes of 2100 mm were to be laid under

'Kanpur Punargathan Payjal Plan Phase Ist', Kanpur and the

applicant was working as Superintendent Engineer. During

inquiry, it was found that the terms and conditions of the

contract with supplier of pipes were changed without approval

of the competent authority and that sub-standard GRP pipes

were used in place of PAC pipes. Terms and conditions

regarding payment to the supplier were also changed and

serious irregularities were committed in payment. Due to the

use sub-standard material, the said scheme became

unserviceable. It was alleged the accused persons including

applicant have committed irregularities at large scale and

breaching trust they have misappropriated public funds and

thereby huge huge loss was caused to the public exchequer.

4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant

that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he

may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is

no credible evidence against him. Learned counsel submitted

that applicant has retired from the post of Superintendent

Engineer in the year 2017 and after one year of the same he has

been falsely implicated in this case. The said incident relates to

the year 2011 and first information report has been lodged after

ten years of the same and the applicant has been made a

scapegoat. In respect of the works and authentication of

instruments, primarily the Chairman or Managing Director is

responsible. In this connection learned counsel has referred the

provisions of Uttar Pradesh Water Supply and Sewerage Act,

1975. Major decisions are taken by the higher officers of Jal

Nigam, whereas applicant was merely working as

Superintendent Engineer and he was not in a position to alter

the conditions of the contract. The allegations that applicant is

liable for procurement of GRP pipes and losses were incurred

due to alteration in contract, are absolutely false. Learned

counsel further submitted that regarding the alleged work, an

inquiry was conducted by the Commissioner, Moradabad

Division, wherein, nothing incriminating was found against the

applicant. It was submitted that power of alteration of

conditions of contract vests with the Managing Director of

Chairman U.P. Jal Nigam, but they have not been made accused

in this case, whereas in the said inquiry, the Chairman and

Managing Director was found responsible for relaxation of

terms and conditions of the contract. It was submitted that to

cover up the mistakes and misdeeds of the higher officers, the

applicant has been made an accused in this case, whereas there

is no credible evidence against him. Learned counsel has

referred various facts, as mentioned in the affidavit filed in

support of the application, and submitted that no case is made

out against the applicant. The applicant is a senior citizen. Co-

accused Rakesh Chaudhary has been granted anticipatory bail

by co-ordinate Bench of this Court, copy of which is available

on record. The applicant undertakes to co-operate during

investigation and trial and he would appear as and when

required