Allahabad High Court

ASHUTOSH THAKURversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 13 May 2026
Bench: VIKRAM D CHAUHAN

Holding

The Court held that the applicant is entitled to bail and allowed the bail application.

Summary

The applicant, Ashutosh Thakur, was arrested in connection with a loan fraud case (Crime No. 988 of 2018) alleging forged documents and money transfers, though he was not named in the FIR. He sought bail, claiming no criminal history, no direct involvement, and that he had already returned the transferred amount. The State opposed bail but did not present any evidence of the applicant’s likelihood to tamper with evidence, intimidate witnesses, or flee. The Court reiterated the principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception under Article 21, citing Satyendra Kumar Antil v. CBI. Finding no material circumstance to deny bail, the Court allowed the bail application subject to standard conditions.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the allegations of involvement in a loan fraud.
Whether there is any risk of the applicant tampering with evidence, intimidating witnesses, or fleeing from justice.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 420, 468, 471
Prevention of Corruption Act — s. 8

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
Article 21
IPC 420
IPC 468
IPC 471
Prevention of Corruption Act
evidence tampering
witness intimidation

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15067 of 2026

Ashutosh Thakur
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjay Prakash Tiwari, Siddharth
Chaudhary, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 73
HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.

1. Learned A.G.A. submits that instructions have been received and has
no objection in case the bail application is heard on merits.

2. Heard Sri D.R. Chaudhari, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Sajay
Prakash Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the
State and perused the record.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant
was not named in the first information report. It is alleged that the
borrower has taken a loan of Rs.18 lacs. The aforesaid loan was taken by
submitting forged documents. The allegation against the applicant during
investigation is that part of the amount was transferred from the loan
account to another account of third entity and from the account of third
entity the amount was transferred in the account of the applicant, which
the applicant has returned to the third entity. There is no direct contact
with the accused persons or loan account in question. The applicant has
been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has no criminal
history. Applicant is languishing in jail since 11.3.2026 and in case he is
released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate
in the trial.

4. Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but does not
dispute factual matrix of the case.
BAIL No. 15067 of 2026
2

5. Learned AGA has not brought any fact or circumstances to indicate
criminal history or antecedents of the applicant which would disentitle the
applicant for Bail.

6. It is not the case of the State that the applicant has not cooperated in the
investigation or proceedings before the trial court.

7. The principle that Bail is a rule and Jail is an exception has been well
recognised by Apex Court more specifically on the touch stone of Article
21 of the Constitution. The said principle has been reiterated by the Apex
Court in Satyendra Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation
and another, 2022 (10) SCC 51. Learned AGA has not shown any
exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the
Applicant.

8. No material, facts or circumstances has been shown by learned AGA
that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses or the
accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would
intimidate the witnesses or that accused will use his liberty to subvert
justice or tamper with the evidence.

9. It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the
attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or
circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or
thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of
repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown
by learned AGA for the State.

10. Learned AGA for the State has not shown any material or
circumstances that the accused/applicant is not entitled to bail in larger
interests of the public or State.

11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence,
evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of learned counsel for
the parties 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.
BAIL No. 15067 of 2026
3

12. Let the applicant Ashutosh Kumar involved in Case Crime No.988
of 2018, under Sections 420, 468, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Section 8 of
Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Ghaziabad
be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the
following conditions:-

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 and/or the applicant shall make
himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when
required.

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.

vi. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of
the Court.

vii. In the event, the applicant changes his residential address, the
applicant shall inform the court concerned about new residential address
in writing.

13. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall
be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)
May 14, 2026
Bhaskar

Digitally signed by :-
BHASKAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…