Allowed¶36

Saurabh Jain v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Anticipatory bail (Section 438 Cr.P.C.) – Saurabh Jain

Allahabad HC27 Jan 2025ABAIL/2800/2024

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Saurabh Jain anticipatory bail Section 438 Cr.P.C.; Case Crime No. 574 of 2022; Sections 420, 467, 268, 471, 500, 120-B I.P.C.; Police Station PGI District Lucknow; parity with co-accused Himanshu Soni ABAIL No. 1763 of 2024 order dated 14.8.2024; interim anticipatory bail 20.12.2024 made absolute; bail application allowed; personal bond two solvent sureties; Subhash Vidyarthi J.; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Lucknow; September 23, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail confirmed: interim order dated 20.12.2024 made absolute; applicant remains released on furnishing a personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (i)-(vii) of the interim order. ¶36

Saurabh Jain vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2800 of 2024

Saurabh Jain

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dr. Pooja Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 13

¶8

HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.

¶9

Case called out. Nobody is present to press the application and no request for adjournment of the case has been made.

¶10

Shri Manish Kumar Pandey, the learned AGA is present.

¶11

On 20.12.2024, after hearing learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had passed the following order:

¶12

"Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶13

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.574 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 268, 471, 500, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station PGI, District Lucknow.

¶14

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He submits that identically situated co-accused Himanshu Soni has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.1763 of 2024, vide order date 14.8.2024 and the applicant is seeking parity of the same. He further submits that the applicant is undertaking that he will co-operate with the investigating proceedings and he will remain present before the Investigating Officer as and when required. He further submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is a law abiding citizen and he has acute apprehension of being arrested by the police, as such, he may be granted anticipatory bail which he will not misuse.

¶15

On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and there is sufficient proof that he has committed offence, as such, he is not

¶16

ABAIL No. 2800 of 2024

¶17

¶18

entitled to any relief.But, he could not dispute the fact that identically situated co-accused has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court.

¶19

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court find it to be a fit case of interim anticipatory bail.

¶20

Till the next date of listing, the present applicant Suarabh Jain shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶21

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶22

(ii) that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶23

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶24

(iv) that in case charge sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶25

(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶26

(vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶27

(vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶28

List/put up this matter in the fourth week of January 2025.

¶29

In the meantime, learned counsel for the State shall file the counter affidavit."

¶30

Office has reported that service upon the opposite party No.2 stands served but the neither the opposite party No.2 is present to oppose the bail application nor any counter affidavit has been filed on his behalf.

¶31

The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of material collected during investigation and the applicant has filed a rejoinder affidavit.

¶32

The learned A.G.A. did not point out any violation of the conditions of interim anticipatory bail by the applicant. Nothing

¶33

ABAIL No. 2800 of 2024

¶34

¶35

has come to light which may persuade this court to take a view, other than the view taken at the time of granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶36

In view of above, the interim order dated 20.12.2024 is made absolute and the anticipatory bail application is allowed in terms of the aforesaid interim order.

¶37

September 23, 2025

¶38

-Amit K-

¶39

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶40

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Saurabh Jain v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurabh Jain v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Santosh Gupta @ Santosh Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Abhay Raj Verma and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Lko

Santosh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Suresh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lko. and 5 Others

Inspector Mohd. Jainuddin Ansari vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./ Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and 3 Others

Deshraj vs State of U.P. and 3 Others