Ankit Maurya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Sectt. Lko and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:24241

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 460 of 2025

Applicant :- Ankit Maurya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Sectt. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shashank Kumar,Prashant Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record.

¶7

First bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.79 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, & 471 I.PC., P.S. Ghazipur, District Lucknow.

¶8

As per contents of first information report, the applicant along with co-accused has allegedly submitted fabricated certificates for the purposes of registration as a Pharmacist.

¶9

It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that first information report has been lodged without verification and scrutinizing all the relevant documents.

¶10

Further submission of learned counsel for applicant is that the case of the applicant is at par with that of coaccused namely, Jafar Ali, Arvind Kumar Chaurasiya, Mohd. Nadeem Khan, Abhishek Kumar Agarwal, Ankit Kumar Agarwal, Sanjay Kumar Chaudhary, Mohan Singh, Abhishek Saxena, Vikram Singh, Akash Kumar Ray and Sandeep Singh and Dhruv Raj Singh who have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 5.8.2024, 29.2.2024, 6.8.2024, 2.9.2024, 5.9.2024,

¶11

1.10.2024, 12.11.2024, 22.7.2024, 22.10.2024, 22.10.2024, 24.10.2024 and 3.1.2025 passed in

¶12

CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. numbered - 1737 of 2024, 424 of 2024, 1746 of 2024, 1992 of 2024, 2042 of 2024, 2265 of 2024, 2506 of 2024, 1600 of 2024, 2494 of 2024, 2495 of 2024, 2430 of 2024 and 2792 of 2024 respectively and as such he claims parity.

¶13

It is submitted that for the last three years the investigation of the case is going on and the applicant is cooperating in the investigation. However, the same is at the concluding stage and the investigating officer by misinterpreting Section 170 of the Cr.P.C. is making all out efforts to apprehend/arrest of the applicant. Applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation and would remain present before the investigating officer as and when his presence would be required.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that having regard to the manner in which the offence has been committed, the applicant is not entitled for any protection but does not dispute the factual aspects of the matter.

¶15

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, it appears that first information report has been lodged against various persons on the same allegations of submitting forged documents. Co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail as indicated herein above.

¶16

Thus, having regard to the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Nathu Singh v. State of U.P. and Others , 2021(6) SCC 64, MANU/SC/0360/2021, protection from arrest for limited period of time i.e. till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., may be granted in favour of the applicant.

¶17

In result, the anticipatory bail application moved by the applicant Ankit Maurya is finally disposed of with a direction that till the submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., in the event of arrest of applicant in the above-mentioned case, he shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/ Investigating Officer subject

¶18

to the following conditions:-

¶19

(1) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation or even for discovery of any fact by a police officer as and when required;

¶20

(2) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶21

(3) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court.

¶22

In case of default of any condition the investigating officer may approach this Court for cancellation/modification of this order.

¶23

Order Date :- 29.4.2025 kvg/-

¶24

Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ankit Maurya v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Sectt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit Maurya v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Sectt. 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

Jagdambika Prasad Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Sushil Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Yunva Kalyan Evam Prantiye Rakshak Dal Lko. and 3 Others

Raj Kamal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ramkumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Priti Devi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Shajid vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another