Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:42335 Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34772 of 2023 Applicant :- Prakash Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Srivastava,Anurag Shukla,Krishna Shankar,Pawan Kumar,Pragya Srivastava,Rajesh Kumar Singh,Sanjay Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- Atul Kumar Yadav,Firdos Ahmad,G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Rejoinder affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh and Sri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State as well as Sri Anand Kumar, holding brief of Sri Atul Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record. 3. As per prosecution story, on the false pretext of providing loan in respect of the marriage of the daughter of the informant, all the three named accused persons in criminal conspiracy with each other managed to grant a loan of Rs.19 lakh in the name of Ankit Pal, the son of the informant, and some signatures were also obtained. When the amount of loan was not deposited in the Bank account of Ankit Pal, it was found by the informant that Rs.12 lakh have been sent in a forged firm owned by Prakash Yadav, the present accused appellant and all the three accused persons grabbed the whole money in criminal conspiracy with each other. Police was informed and F.I.R. was registered and after investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted in the matter. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has not committed any offence. Alleged offences are not made out against the applicant. The allegations made in the F.I.R. are false. F.I.R. has been lodged belatedly, of which no plausible explanation has been given. It is further submitted that no amount of any kind has been received by the applicant either personally or in the account of any firm owned by the present applicant. It is also submitted that the loan amount was deposited in the account of a firm which is owned by co-accused Manoj Kumar Gupta. Present applicant is having no concern with the said firm. When the informant complained of this fact to co-accused Manoj Kumar Gupta, he himself released some cheques in favour of the informant but the same were dishonoured. It is also submitted that the co-accused Manoj Kumar Gupta has been granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.14026 of 2024 on the ground of incarceration period, which was 1 year 4 months at the time of grant of bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the present matter, copy of which has been appended in the rejoinder affidavit filed today in the matter. It is also submitted that the applicant has been languishing in jail since 15.7.2023 having no criminal antecedents to his credit. In case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the poor informant lady of this case has been deceived by the accused persons including the present accused applicant and they grabbed the loan amount, which was to be given to the informant / her son. 6. Grounds taken in the bail application are sufficient. Hence, keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the period of incarceration of the applicant, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 7. Let the applicant Prakash Yadav involved in Case Crime No.82 of 2023 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District - Etawah be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (v) 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. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 21.3.2025 ss Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad