Allahabad High Court
Satyank Prakash vs State Of U.P. And Another on 30 July, 2025
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:127094
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 4262 of 2025
Applicant :- Satyank Prakash
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant today is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Dipak Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.122 of 2019, registered under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474, 409, 120-B IPC and Section 68 of I.T. Act at Police Station- Harpur Budahat, District Gorakhpur with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and he has nothing to do with the said offence. The applicant is not named in the FIR. The named accused person has committed forgery in collusion with his family members. Subsequently, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the said case on the basis that he had issued a cheque regarding the same offence but the said cheque was signed by the Secretary of the society. The applicant was subsequently posted as the President of the said society, as such he is entitled for anticipatory bail.
5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
6. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court.
7. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Satyank Prakash be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/court concerned with the following conditions:-
i. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
ii. that 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;
iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
iv. that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
vi. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
vii. that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
8. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
Order Date :- 30.7.2025
Sumit S
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
