State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. vs Party(s)

Mr. Ajay Kumar Kulwant, Dy. Jailor.

2. Applicant specifically stated that his name is Ashok Bajpai.

3. He has been implicated in the present case as well as one another case with the allegation that he was the guarantor in a loan matter which was taken by Mr. Sumit Chaturvedi and forged documents were provided by the applicant in relation to the alleged property which was mortgaged. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he has not signed any document but the charge-sheet was submitted by the Investigating officer.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he has already been enlarged on bail by this Court in Bail Application No. 2629 of 2020 dated 08.03.2021 with the direction that applicant be released on bail in the present case on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties, one should be of an family member, each to the satisfaction of the Court concerned subject to some condition.

5. Order dated 08.03.2021 is as under:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA- I, for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2 A482 No. 8739 of 2025 It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. It is next contended that the ingredients of offences are absent and entire prosecution story is based on false and frivolous allegations. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant is in jail since 10.12.2019 and undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant without disputing the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that in case applicant is released on bail he will misuse the liberty of bail. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail. Let applicant- Ashok Kumar Bajpai alias Tarachand, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 106 of 2019, under Sections - 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120 B IPC, Police Station- Vikas Nagar, District- Lucknow, on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties (one should be of a family member) each, to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

1. The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

2. He will not tamper with the witnesses.

3. He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court 3 A482 No. 8739 of 2025 concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case. The concerned court below is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a copy of this order. This Bail Application is accordingly allowed. "

6. Counsel for the applicant submitted that as the applicant is not having any family member, he is alone and therefore he is unable to satisfy the condition order by this Court in the bail order dated 08.03.2021, therefore conditions may be changed.

7. He has also relied on the decision of this Court in the case of Arvind Singh Vs. Sate of U.P. in Application Under Section 482 No. 2613 of 2023 and also submitted that in accordance with the provisions of Section 440 the amount of every bond executed under Chapter XXXIII is to be fixed with regard to the circumstances of the case and shall not be excessive and this principal was also laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51 and requested that conditions imposed by this court in the aforesaid bail order may be modified and he may be enlarged on his personal bond as well as two sureties of reasonable amount.

8. Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that in the bail order dated

08.03.2021 direction was issued that the applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing personal bond and two heavy sureties, one of family member. He also does not dispute the legal pronouncement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and another (supra).

9. Considering the submission of counsel for the parties, going through the contents of the petition as well as other relevant material as the applicant is in jail since 10.12.2019 as his bail order was passed on 4 A482 No. 8739 of 2025

08.03.2021 in Bail Application No. 2629 of 2020 with the observation that he be released on bail in Case Crime No. 106 of 2019 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of IPC, Police Station Vikas Nagar District Lucknow on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties, one should be of a family member.

10. As the applicant is alone in his family, therefore he is unable to satisfy the condition that one surety be of his family member, therefore, the condition imposed in the bail order dated 08.03.2021 is modified that the applicant be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 106 of 2019 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of IPC, Police Station Vikas Nagar District Lucknow on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of amounting Rs. 25,000/- .

11. Accordingly the petition is disposed of.

12. Copy of this order be communicated to the trial Court and Senior Superintendent of District Jail, Lucknow, forthwith. November 20, 2025 Anurag (Rajeev Singh,J.) ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mr. Ajay Kumar Kulwant, Dy. Jailor.

2. Applicant specifically stated that his name is Ashok Bajpai.

3. He has been implicated in the present case as well as one another case with the allegation that he was the guarantor in a loan matter which was taken by Mr. Sumit Chaturvedi and forged documents were provided by the applicant in relation to the alleged property which was mortgaged. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he has not signed any document but the charge-sheet was submitted by the Investigating officer.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he has already been enlarged on bail by this Court in Bail Application No. 2629 of 2020 dated 08.03.2021 with the direction that applicant be released on bail in the present case on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties, one should be of an family member, each to the satisfaction of the Court concerned subject to some condition.

5. Order dated 08.03.2021 is as under:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA- I, for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2 A482 No. 8739 of 2025 It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. It is next contended that the ingredients of offences are absent and entire prosecution story is based on false and frivolous allegations. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant is in jail since 10.12.2019 and undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant without disputing the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that in case applicant is released on bail he will misuse the liberty of bail. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail. Let applicant- Ashok Kumar Bajpai alias Tarachand, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 106 of 2019, under Sections - 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120 B IPC, Police Station- Vikas Nagar, District- Lucknow, on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties (one should be of a family member) each, to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

1. The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

2. He will not tamper with the witnesses.

3. He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court 3 A482 No. 8739 of 2025 concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case. The concerned court below is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a copy of this order. This Bail Application is accordingly allowed. "

6. Counsel for the applicant submitted that as the applicant is not having any family member, he is alone and therefore he is unable to satisfy the condition order by this Court in the bail order dated 08.03.2021, therefore conditions may be changed.

7. He has also relied on the decision of this Court in the case of Arvind Singh Vs. Sate of U.P. in Application Under Section 482 No. 2613 of 2023 and also submitted that in accordance with the provisions of Section 440 the amount of every bond executed under Chapter XXXIII is to be fixed with regard to the circumstances of the case and shall not be excessive and this principal was also laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51 and requested that conditions imposed by this court in the aforesaid bail order may be modified and he may be enlarged on his personal bond as well as two sureties of reasonable amount.

8. Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that in the bail order dated

08.03.2021 direction was issued that the applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing personal bond and two heavy sureties, one of family member. He also does not dispute the legal pronouncement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and another (supra).

9. Considering the submission of counsel for the parties, going through the contents of the petition as well as other relevant material as the applicant is in jail since 10.12.2019 as his bail order was passed on 4 A482 No. 8739 of 2025

08.03.2021 in Bail Application No. 2629 of 2020 with the observation that he be released on bail in Case Crime No. 106 of 2019 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of IPC, Police Station Vikas Nagar District Lucknow on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties, one should be of a family member.

10. As the applicant is alone in his family, therefore he is unable to satisfy the condition that one surety be of his family member, therefore, the condition imposed in the bail order dated 08.03.2021 is modified that the applicant be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 106 of 2019 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of IPC, Police Station Vikas Nagar District Lucknow on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of amounting Rs. 25,000/- .

11. Accordingly the petition is disposed of.

12. Copy of this order be communicated to the trial Court and Senior Superintendent of District Jail, Lucknow, forthwith. November 20, 2025 Anurag (Rajeev Singh,J.) ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench