Allowed

Ajai Prakash Upadhyaya @ Ajai Kumar Upadhyay v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Annexe Bhawan and Another

Allahabad HC29 Oct 2025ABAIL/2061/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail in an FIR for forgery and cheating offences. The court noted no prima facie material against the applicant and that he cooperated without misusing interim protection, and made the earlier interim anticipatory bail protection absolute.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail made absolute; applicant released on arrest upon furnishing personal bond with two sureties, subject to cooperation conditions.

Ajai Prakash Upadhyaya @ Ajai Kumar Upadhyay Vs State of… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2061 of 2024

¶3

Ajai Prakash Upadhyaya @ Ajai Kumar Upadhyay

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Annexe Bhawan And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Chandra Shekhar Sinha, Akshat Sinha, Gaurav Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Abhay Nath Mishra, Gaurav Singh Court No. - 15

¶7

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶8

Learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the respondent State are present. None appears for the complainant.

¶9

The applicant has moved the present application praying for grant of anticipatory bail in case crime/FIR No. 12/2024, under Sections 406/420/467/468/471 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Ayodhya.

¶10

This Court while giving interim protection has passed the following order on 6.9.2024 :-

¶11

"Heard learned counsel the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime/FIR No. 12/2024, under Sections 406/420/467/468/471 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Ayodhya. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the complainant has made allegations only against accused no. 1. Only bald and sweeping allegations have been made against the rest of the accused persons. There is no specific allegation against the present applicant. No material against the applicant has been collected by the investigating officer. The applicant has been falsely implicated.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the applicant was employee of M/s Anee Commodity Brokers Pvt. Limited, he has been falsely implicated in 47 cases of different police stations of District Ayodhya and Lucknow as its director Ajit Gupta was also running/associated with several other companies. Apart from the cases related to M/s Anee Bullion Traders, there is no other criminal history of

¶13

ABAIL No. 2061 of 2024

¶14

¶15

the applicant and neither he is a previous convict.

¶16

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant will cooperate in the investigation. Issue notice to respondent No. 2. Steps be taken within a week.

¶17

Learned AGA has opposed the bail application submitting that the applicant has a criminal history of 47 cases of similar nature, however, from the he could not show any material assigning any role of the applicant in commission of the offence. List on 30.09.2024. Perused the record.

¶18

Prima facie from perusal of the FIR, there appears to be no material against the applicant; criminal history relating to one company where the applicant was employee has been explained by him.

¶19

On due consideration to the observations made herein above as well as considering the fact that the applicant is not a previous convict and also considering the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, as an interim measure, it would be appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶20

Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned.

¶21

The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.

¶22

In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection.

¶23

Learned AGA shall file counter affidavit in the meantime. "

¶24

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in compliance of order extracted above, the applicant has filed bonds before the trial court and the applicant has cooperated in the trial and not misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail. It is submitted that the applicant undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

¶25

Learned A.G.A. could not dispute the fact that the applicant has cooperated in the investigation and has not misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail.

¶26

ABAIL No. 2061 of 2024

¶27

¶28

Considering the interim protection granted vide order extracted above which has not been misused by the applicant, undertaking that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial, and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I am of the opinion that the interim protection granted earlier is liable to be and is hereby made absolute .

¶29

The application is allowed accordingly.

¶30

October 29, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S

¶31

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶32

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ajai Prakash Upadhyaya @ Ajai Kumar Upadhyay v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Annexe Bhawan and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajai Prakash Upadhyaya @ Ajai Kumar Upadhyay v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Annexe Bhawan and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vijay Singh Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Munna @ Shoaib @ Mohammad Shoaib Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Ram Janki Mishra and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Hari Ram Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Ashok Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Farki Roka Magar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.