Allahabad High Court
RAMASHRAY PRAJAPATIversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Ramashray Prajapati, who is charged under several IPC sections including 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 352 and 351(3)BNS for allegedly misappropriating Rs 35 lakh invested by his wife and son. The applicant contended that the allegations are false, that his son transferred the money to various accounts, and that his wife Kiran Prajapati had already been released on bail in a related matter. He also disclosed a prior criminal case under section 406 IPC for which he is on bail, while he has been in custody for eight months in the present case. The Assistant Government Advocate opposed bail but did not dispute the factual submissions. After reviewing the record, the Court held that the applicant is entitled to bail, subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and conditions restricting tampering with evidence and criminal activity. The bail was granted without expressing any opinion on the merits of the underlying offences.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant, despite serious charges and a prior criminal history, should be released on bail pending trial
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 351(3)BNS, 352, 406
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- misappropriation
- criminal history
- sureties
- court conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42335 of 2025
Ramashray Prajapati
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Deepak Upadhyay, Raj Kumar Sharma, Rajjan
Kumar, Rohit Nandan Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Heard Sri Deepak Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Kunwar
Tejendra Bahadir, learned AGA for the State-respondent.
2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in
Case Crime No.304 of 2025, under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 352,
351(3)BNS, Police Station Kotwali, District Basti, during pendency of the trial in the
court below.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however as per allegation on the
assurance and instigation of applicant, his wife and son informant invested Rs. Thirty
five lacs but his entire money has been misappropriated but entire allegation made
against the applicant, his wife and son are totally false.
4. He next submitted, on the assurance of the son of the applicant i.e. co-accused
Gaurav informant invested amount and Rs. 34,60,000/- have been transferred by co-
accused Gaurav in different accounts which were provided by informant and this fact
is evident from supplementary affidavit dated 1.11.2025 filed in support to the instant
bail application and therefore, it can not be said, accused duped him.
5. He further submitted that even wife of applicant i.e. Kiran Prajapati has been
released on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 2.4.2025 passed
in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 8257 of 2026 and as far as allegations are
concerned case of applicant is at par with her.
6. He further submitted that however applicant is having criminal history of one
another case of section 406 IPC but in that case he is on bail and he is in jail in the
present matter since 27.8.2025 i.e. for eight months.
7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the
arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
BAIL No. 42335 of 2025
2
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
9. However, as per allegation on the allurement of the applicant, his wife and his son
informant invested Rs. Thirty five lacs and his entire money has been misappropriated
by them but it reflects wife of the applicant i.e. Kiran Prajapati has already been
released on bail and as far as allegations are concerned case of applicant is at par with
her.
10. Further, applicant is however having criminal history of one another case of
section 406 IPC but in that case he is on bail and he is in jail in the present matter for
last eight months.
11. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in
my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
12. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant
bail application is allowed.
13. Let the applicant-Ramashray Prajapati, be released on bail in the aforesaid case
on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his
personal presence is exempted.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.
14. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty
to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.
15. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in
by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations
shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.
April 23, 2026
Ankita
(Sameer Jain,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ANKITA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…