Monday, 18, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Jay Jay Ram Upadhyay vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 699 ALL

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 699 ALL
Judgement Date : 9 January, 2023

Allahabad High Court
Jay Jay Ram Upadhyay vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 9 January, 2023
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar



HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 12
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1224 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Jay Jay Ram Upadhyay
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Purnendu Chakravarty
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abhijeet Kumar Srivastav,Vinay Misra
 
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. 

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as learned counsel appearing for the complainant.

Gist of the controversy involved in the present case has been dealt with by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in it's order dated 23rd of August, 2022 which is extracted below:

"Heard Sri Purnendu Chakravarty, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Abhijeet Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Prem Prakash Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant, Jay Jay Ram Upadhyay under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 245 of 2017, for offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station- Alambagh, District- Lucknow till the conclusion of the trail, after rejecting the Anticipatory Bail application of the applicant by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Lucknow order dated 01.07.2022.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. As per allegations of the First Information Report dated 04.08.2017, the applicant obtained service on the basis of forged and fabricated mark-sheets. It is further alleged that charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicant on the basis of statements of four persons including the first informant and three police personnel.

It is further submitted that the applicant give interview for the post of Assistant Teacher in the year 1998 before the by Madhyamik Shiksha Seva Selection Board, Prayagraj and was selected as Assistant Teacher. It is further submitted that the applicant was promoted on 18.10.2010 by the Madhyamik Shiksha Seva Selection Board, Prayagraj and he joined as a Principal in Santosh Kumar Inter College, Hardoi and thereafter, he was transferred to Railway Higher Secondary School, Charbagh, Lucknow and is serving there till date. It is further submitted that no departmental inquiry has been conducted or is pending with regard to forged and fabricated mark-sheets.

It is further submitted that during investigation, no cogent or clinching evidence has been collected from the University, Allahabad or from Madhyamik Shiksha Seva Selection Board, Prayagraj. It is further submitted there is no requirement of custodial interrogation in the instant case.

He has next argued that the applicant has no previous criminal history and if the applicant is released on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

Learned A.G.A as well as learned counsel for the first informant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant.

It is settled position of law that the anticipatory bail being an extraordinary privilege should be granted only in exceptional cases. Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence are required to be satisfied, where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has falsely roped in the crime and would not misuse his liberty.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98, ground for grant of ad interim anticipatory bail is made out.

Learned A.G.A. may file counter affidavits within two weeks.

Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within one week thereafter.

List for final hearing on 14.09.2022.

In the meantime, in case of arrest, the applicant, Jay Jay Ram Upadhyay is directed to be enlarged on interim anticipatory bail in above case crime number, on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties each of like amount before the Station House Officer of Police Station/Court concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required, if investigation is in progress;

(ii) 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 such person from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned/Court concerned;

The Investigating Officer will continue with the investigation, if it is in progress and will not be affected by this order."

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted the applicant is presently posted as Principal in the Railway Higher Secondary School, Charbagh, Lucknow. He is a reputed person having no criminal antecedents. The informant is an employee of the same college where the applicant is posted and the FIR has been lodged only with a view to maline the reputation of the applicant and harass him. The Investigating Officer has filed the chargesheet without even verifying the RTI documents which were provided by the informant to him. No original documents relating to RTI have been collected by the Investigating Officer. The applicant all throughout has co-operated the investigation.

Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the anticipatory bail, however they could not dispute the fact that no original documents relating to RTI have been collected by the Investigating Officer while filing the chargesheet. Learned AGA also does not dispute the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has co-operated in the investigation.

On due consideration to the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perusal of the record, so also the facts that the applicant is not having any criminal antecedents, has co-operated in the investigation and is presently posted as Principal in Railway Higher Secondary School, Charbagh, Lucknow, the interim protection, granted vide order of this Court dated 23rd of August, 2022 and in view of the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC OnLine 98, is affirmed. However, the accused-applicant is directed to surrender before trial court, if chargesheet has been filed and he is summoned to face trial for offence in question. The accused-applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail by the trial court on his furnishing the same bail bonds as executed by him consequent to the order dated 23.08.2022, as extracted above, to the satisfaction of the trial court with the following conditions.

(i) 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 tamper with the evidence;

(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.

It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

In view of the aforesaid, the application is disposed of.

Order Date :- 9.1.2023

kkv/

 

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter