Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:72834 Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17867 of 2024 Applicant :- Upendra Rai Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Singh,Saurabh Chaturvedi,Vijay Laxmi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Alok Kumar Dubey,G.A.,Saumitra Dwivedi Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard Shri V. P. Srivastava and Shri I. K. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocates, assisted by Shri Saurabh Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Jai Kishan Chaurasia, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Shri Vinay Saran, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Shri Saumitra Dwivedi and Shri Alok Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the informant. 2. By means of the instant bail application, the applicant, Upendra Rai, seeks bail in Case Crime No. 80 of 2024, under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Line Bazar, District Jaunpur. 3. The F.I.R. dated 09.02.2024 was lodged by the informant against seven named accused including the applicant and 6-7 unknown persons. The allegation made in the F.I.R. is that in the year 2021 the named accused-Shakeel, Imran, Raisuddin and Ram Singh told the informant that they need one person to run a Showroom/ Food Restaurant of a branded company in Jaunpur. Upendra Rai (applicant) who is the U.P. East Head and Ramesh Rao who is the Senior Officer of that company are their friends and they will make a deal with him. On the advice of the aforesaid accused, the informant gave fifty lakh rupees to the aforesaid accused persons, which money was given by them to the accused- applicant Upendra Rai, who in turn prepared a receipt from his laptop, which receipt was given to him Ramesh Rao, who also told the informant that he shall deposit remaining amount of thirty lakh rupees within a week thereafter within 90 days he will received allotment letter, thereafter, on 10.03.2021 the informant also gave remaining thirty lakh rupees, but no allotment letter has been provided him even after a lapse of two years. When the informant reached at Jaunpur on 14.12.2023 and met the accused-applicant Upendra Rai and told him that he will report the matter to the police, then Upendra Rai gave him a cheque amount to fifty lakh rupees and when this cheque was deposited by the informant in his Bank account the same became dishonour on account of insufficient amount. Thus, informant has been cheated by all the accused including the applicant to the tune of eighty lakh rupees. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there are seven named persons along with 6-7 unknown persons. Though the applicant is also named in the F.I.R. and allegation against him is that by misrepresenting himself East Head of that Branded Company, he along with other accused had cheated the informant to the tune of eighty lakh rupees, but as per his statement no online transaction was done and all the money was given in cash. The F.I.R. was lodged after a lapse of three years without there being plausible explanation of delay in lodging of the F.I.R. At the time of lodging of the F.I.R. the applicant was in jail. The applicant has no concern either with the other accused or the informant and he has not given any cheque to the informant. The cheque No. 050904 was given by the applicant to one Bindu Kumar Mishra which has been misused and the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The matter relates to civil dispute but the informant had given colour of criminal proceeding. As to the criminal history of the applicant that has been explained. The applicant is in jail since 06.02.2024. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail by contending that applicant gave forged receipt of fifty lakh rupees showing himself as the East Head of the Branded Company. The cheque No. 050904 was given by him to the informant which became dishonour due to insufficient funds as is evident from case diary. The offence is made out against the applicant as he prepared forged document. Thus, there is active participation of applicant in the commission of offence, therefore, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. 6. Keeping in view submissions of learned counsel for the parties, gravity of offence, nature of allegations and all the attending facts and circumstances of the case including the fact that by giving a cheque of fifty lakh rupees to the informant the applicant had himself admitted that he had taken fifty lakh rupees from the informant showing himself to be the East Head of a branded company which became dishonour, thus, he cheated the informant and usurp the money, therefore, there is active participation of applicant in the commission of offence. The present bail application has no merit and deserves to be rejected. 7. Accordingly, the present bail application filed on behalf of applicant-Upendra Rai is rejected. 8. The trial court is directed to make all possible efforts/ endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously. Order Date :- 6.5.2025 Mustaqeem. Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad