Prem Kumar Bajpai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC7 Jul 2025ABAIL/551/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail; Section 438 Cr.P.C.; interim bail of 27.05.2025 made absolute; Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C.; Case Crime No. 43 of 2016; P.S. Fatehpur Chaurasi, District Unnao; alleged fraudulent mutation of ancestral property; relied on Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1 / 2020 SCC OnLine SC 98; no previous criminal history; charge-sheet already filed; no misuse of liberty of anticipatory bail; undertaking to cooperate in trial; Prem Kumar Bajpai v. State of U.P.; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; 2025:AHC-LKO:38316; order dated 07.07.2025.

What did the court decide?

Final (absolute) anticipatory bail: interim protection granted vide order dated 27.05.2025 made absolute in favour of the applicant. ¶¶31

Prem Kumar Bajpai Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Final (absolute) anticipatory bail: interim protection granted vide order dated 27.05.2025 made absolute in favour of the applicant.

¶¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the interim anticipatory protection granted to the applicant by the Co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 27.05.2025 should be made absolute, i.e., whether final anticipatory bail should be granted.

¶¶31

Court's answer

The interim protection granted by the Court vide order dated 27.05.2025 is made absolute, i.e., the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi).

¶¶31

Ratio / Principle

In making the interim protection absolute, the Court acted without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation, the applicant having no previous criminal history, the charge-sheet already having been filed, the applicant not having misused the liberty of anticipatory bail granted by this Court, and the applicant's undertaking to cooperate in the trial.

¶¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Karunesh Singh Pawar, J. (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:38316), Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 551 of 2025, decided 07.07.2025 — Prem Kumar Bajpai v. State of U.P.: anticipatory bail sought in Case Crime No. 43 of 2016, P.S. Fatehpur Chaurasi, District Unnao, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., the FIR alleging that the applicant fraudulently got his name mutated over a portion of ancestral property. A Co-ordinate Bench had granted interim anticipatory bail on 27.05.2025 following the law laid down in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi); the applicant furnished personal bond and two sureties before the concerned C.J.M. and cooperated in the investigation; the charge-sheet was already on record. The interim protection was made absolute in view of the Apex Court dictum in Sushila Aggarwal ((2020) 5 SCC 1; 2020 SCC OnLine SC 98), the Court expressly refraining from expressing any opinion on the merits, taking into account the nature of the accusation, absence of previous criminal history, prior filing of the charge-sheet, non-misuse of the interim bail liberty, and the applicant's undertaking to cooperate in the trial. Application allowed.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:38316

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 551 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Prem Kumar Bajpai Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Chandra Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Srees Kumar Srivastava,Tiwari Shivani Subhash

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 43 of 2016 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Fatehpur Chaurasi, District Unnao.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶9

The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.05.2025 has passed the following order:-

¶10

" 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party no.1State.

¶11

1A. Learned counsel for applicant is granted liberty to implead the informant as opposite party no.2 and to renumber the opposite parties during course of the day.

¶12

2. Issue notice to opposite party no.2.

¶13

3. First Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with regard to Case Crime no.43 of 2016 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Fatehpur Chaurasi, District Unnao.

¶14

4. As per contents of first information report, applicant who also belongs to family of informant allegedly got his name mutated over a portion of the ancestral property fraudulently.

¶15

5. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in allegations levelled against him which would be evident from fact that applicant is the son of second wife of father of informant and also has a share in the ancestral property. It is submitted that earlier applicant had filed Writ Petition No.13834(M/B) of 2016 in which he was granted stay from arrest vide order dated 10.06.2016 and thereafter has filed Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. bearing no.5221 of 2019 in which he was granted liberty to file an application for discharge and till then

¶16

protection was provided. It is submitted that charge-sheet in the meantime has been filed and applicant undertakes to cooperate in the trial. It is submitted that applicant does not have any previous criminal history.

¶17

6. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed anticipatory bail but does not dispute aforesaid factual aspects.

¶18

7. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, it appears that primary dispute pertains to alleged fraudulent mutation entries. The aspect of applicant's share in ancestral property and civil dispute being given a criminal colour would require consideration. Earlier protection had been granted to applicant. Thus, in view of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, it would be appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C./482 BNSS.

¶19

8. List this case on 07.07.2025, as fresh, along with service report.

¶20

9. Objections may be filed in the meantime.

¶21

10. In view of above, interim anticipatory bail is granted to applicant providing that in the event of arrest, applicant Prem Kumar Bajpai shall be released on interim bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶22

(i) 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 tamper with the evidence;

¶23

(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶24

(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶25

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

¶26

(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

¶27

Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed. "

¶28

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been released on interim anticipatory bail after filing of the personal bonds and two sureties before the court of concerned C.J.M. He has duly cooperated in the investigation. Chargesheet in the case has already been filed. He has not misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail granted by this Court. He

¶29

undertakes to cooperate in the trial and in case, he is enlarged on anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of same.

¶30

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶31

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation so also the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history, charge-sheet in the case has already been filed, the applicant has not misused the liberty of anticipatory bail granted by this Court coupled with the undertaking given by the applicant that he will cooperate in the trial as also the interim protection granted by this Court vide order dated 27.05.2025 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)2020 SCC online SC 98.

¶32

The application stands allowed .

¶33

Order Date :- 7.7.2025 Shravan

¶34

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

Prem Kumar Bajpai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Kumar Bajpai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Mohd. Fayaz Ahmad @ Faizan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohit Maurya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Mohd. Sahil Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Govt. Lko

Anand Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Masrur Ahmad in Fir Masroof Ahmad @ Masrur Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko

Chandan Dixit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another