Ashutosh Kumar Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:3584

Court No. - 16

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 79 of 2025

Applicant :- Ashutosh Kumar Upadhyay Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vishwa Nath Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Vishwa Nath Singh, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records.

¶7

The present application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime/F.I.R. No.0457 of 2022, under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Masauli, District Barabanki.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 10.08.2022 against four persons, including the applicant, stating that in connivance with the applicant, who was Kanoongo, accused persons had wrongly got date of birth of the applicant's minor son altered so as to project him as an adult and had got the sale-deed executed by him.

¶9

In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail-application it has been contended that the applicant is innocent, he has no criminal history and he has falsely been implicated in the present case.

¶10

The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that all the other accused persons have been granted bail/anticipatory bail and copies of the bail orders have been annexed as Annexure 13 of the affidavit filed in support of the application. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that a suit for cancellation of the sale deed has already been filed.

¶11

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶12

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that three co-accused persons have been granted bail and one accused person has been granted anticipatory bail; that the applicant is working as Kanoongo, therefore, there is no reasonable apprehension of him fleeing from the process of law, coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal history and

¶13

without making any observations which may affect the outcome of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶14

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant- Ashutosh Kumar Upadhyay before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two solvent sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of S.H.O./Court concerned on the following conditions and subject to any other conditions that may be fixed by the Trial Court:

¶15

(i) That the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted;

¶16

(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;

¶17

(iii) That the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

It is made clear that in case the applicant does not cooperate with the investigation, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of this bail.

¶19

Order Date :- 21.1.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S

¶20

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

Ashutosh Kumar Upadhyay v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashutosh Kumar Upadhyay v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jitendra Kanaujiya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

X Juvenile Thru. His Paternal Uncle Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Guddu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Amit Kumar Patel Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 6 Others

Ashutosh Kumar Upadhyay vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Raj Kumar Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another