AJEET YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO AND ANOTHER
ABAIL/719/2025 · 2025-07-01
Karunesh Singh Pawar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 148243 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 148243 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36820 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 719 of 2025 Applicant :- Ajeet Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shailendra Singh,Poonam Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime/FIR No. 37/2024, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and 4/10 U.P. Public Examination Act, Police Station Banthara, District Lucknow. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Notice to respondent no. 2 is dispensed with in view of the proposed order. According to the prosecution, in the U.P. Police Radio Operator Recruitment Examination, it is alleged that co-accused Praveen Kumar was caught impersonating the applicant and was arrested at the spot. A charge sheet has already been filed against co-accused Praveen Kumar, while the investigation against the applicant is still ongoing.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that no useful purpose will be served in sending the applicant in the custody and he undertakes to cooperate fully with the investigation On the other hand, learned AGA submits that the offence is of a serious nature. The applicant is actively involved and has not been falsely implicated. He is alleged to be associated with a
solver gang. Referring to the case diary, it is submitted that the applicant's involvement is supported by evidence, including financial transactions between him and co-accused Praveen Kumar, against whom a charge sheet was filed a year ago. Having considered the arguments advanced, the seriousness of the offence, and the evidence collected during the investigation, this does not appear to be a case of false implication. There is a prima facie case indicating the applicant's involvement. Accordingly, no ground is made out for granting anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application is rejected.
Order Date :- 1.7.2025 R.C. Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench