Ved Prakash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39749

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4284 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Ved Prakash Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

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

¶8

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the applicant was apprehended at Pragya Balika Inter College, Semera, during the Group D recruitment examination of the High Court, Prayagraj, while impersonating Rinku Gurjar and appearing in the examination on his behalf.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and the offences alleged are triable by a Magistrate. It is further submitted that the co-accused, Rinku Gurjar, who was allegedly impersonated, has already been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.05.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4177 of 2025.

¶10

It is also contended that the applicant has never passed any competitive examination. The prosecution version is highly improbable as considering his background, it is unlikely that anyone would hire him and pay a large sum for solving examination papers. He is in custody since 10.03.2025 and has no prior criminal history.

¶11

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged

¶12

on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

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

¶14

Considering the bail granted to co-accused Rinku Gurjar, the filing of the charge sheet, the applicant’s continued incarceration since 10.03.2025, and his clean antecedents, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court finds it to be a fit case for grant of bail.

¶15

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶16

Let the applicant Ved Prakash involved in Crime No.97 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) BNS (erstwhile Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC) & Sections 11, 13(5) of U.P. Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Ordinance Act, 2024, registered at Police Station Chinhat, District Lucknow be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶17

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶18

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶19

(iii) 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.

¶20

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as

¶21

abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶22

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶23

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 of BNS).

¶24

Order Date :- 11.7.2025 R.C.

¶25

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ved Prakash v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ved Prakash v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. 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. Wahid Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Shahanawaz Khan @ Annu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Add. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Rajendra Prasad @ Buddhi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ram Chander Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Ganga Dhar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Vinod Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.