Allahabad High Court
JAI PRAKASH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The court confirmed the interim anticipatory bail and allowed the anticipatory bail application, permitting the applicant to remain on bail till trial.
Summary
The applicant, Jai Prakash Yadav, sought anticipatory bail under CrPC Section 482 in a case involving alleged cheating under IPC Sections 140(1), 127(2), 351(3), 352 and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court had earlier granted interim anticipatory bail on 17‑03‑2026, which the applicant claimed he had not misused. The State opposed the prayer but did not dispute the factual submissions. The High Court examined the nature of the allegations, the applicant’s prior criminal history, and the fact that the investigation was still pending. It confirmed the interim anticipatory bail, allowing the applicant to remain on bail until the trial concludes, subject to the same conditions previously imposed, and clarified that this order would not prejudice the trial judge’s independent assessment.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to confirmation of interim anticipatory bail despite prior criminal history
- Whether the nature of the allegations under the IPC and Negotiable Instruments Act warrants denial of anticipatory bail
- Whether the pending investigation and apprehension of arrest justify granting anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 127(2), 140(1), 351(3), 352
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — s. 138
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- IPC sections
- Negotiable Instruments Act
- criminal history
- bail conditions
- Uttar Pradesh
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 2497 of 2026
Jai Prakash Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pravesh Kumar, Rajeev Kumar Yadav,
Ramdeo Mani Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Heard Sri Ramdeo Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant
and Sri R.N. Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.
2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of
the applicant in Case Crime No. 0041 of 2026, under Sections
140(1), 127(2), 351(3), 352 BNS and Section 138 of Negotiable
Instruments Act, Police Station Kaptanganj, District Azamgarh, with a
prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail during trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that however, as per
allegation, applicant cheated the informant but he is a bona-fide
purchaser and considering this facts of the case coordinate Bench of
this Court was pleased to enlarge the applicant on interim anticipatory
bail on 17.03.2026 and he never misused the liberty granted to him.
4. He next submits that the investigation of the case is still pending
and applicant is having apprehension of his arrest.
5. He next submits that apart from the present case, applicant is
having criminal history of two other cases but in one case, after
investigation final report has been submitted and in another case,
applicant is on bail.
6. He further submitted that as after considering entire facts in detail
NABAIL No. 2497 of 2026
2
co-ordinate Bench of this Court enlarged the applicant on interim
anticipatory bail and therefore, interim anticipatory bail granted to the
applicant may be confirmed and applicant may be permitted to
remain on anticipatory bail till trial.
7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer but could not dispute
the other arguments on fact advanced by learned counsel for the
applicant.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the
record of the case.
9. Considering the nature of allegation levelled against the applicant
and the facts that criminal history of the applicant has been explained
interim anticipatory bail granted to applicant vide order dated
17.03.2026 is hereby confirmed. Applicant shall remain on
anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on the same conditions as
imposed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court while enlarging him on
interim anticipatory bail.
10. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands
allowed.
11. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory
bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge
in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the
witnesses.
(Sameer Jain,J.)
May 12, 2026
Mini
Digitally signed by :-
MINI KANAUJIYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…