BAIL/44926/2025 of ANIL KUMAR SINGH YADAV Vs STATE OF U.P. on 28 September 2026

1. Heard Sri Rahul Saxena, learned counsel for accused applicant and learned A.G.A. for State. 1A. This is time fixed matter. None appeared for the informant. 1B. On the previous date i.e. 16.09.2026, this Court has made following observation, which is reiterated underneath :- "1. Sri Rahul Saxena, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State are present.

2. None appeared for the informant. On the last occasion, this court has fixed the matter for today at 2:00 p.m. There is illness slip of other side.

3. List on 29.09.2026 at 2:00 p.m."

2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant/ accused- Anil Kumar Singh Yadav to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 430 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 352, 351(2) and 351(3) BNS, P.S.- Civil Lines, District- Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial.

3. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that false and frivolous FIR has been lodged belatedly against the accused/applicant and his wife on 17.10.2025 by the informant Shashank Bajpai with the allegation that the accused persons had cheated the firm of informant's wife in the name of Prisha Enterprises. It is further contended that the allegation in the FIR is pertaining to the occurrence from 05.07.2023 to 01.09.2024. In this period it Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Aushim Luthra, Pranav Tiwary, Rahul Saxena, Shikher Trivedi, Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ram Prakash Singh, G.A. Anil Kumar Singh Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)

is alleged that the accused/applicant has issued as sub tender to the firm of informant's wife for the work of renovation carried out in the city of Prayagraj, which the accused has obtained from the Prayagraj Development Authority. It is the contention of learned counsel that there was never a sub tender issued to the Prisha Enterprises. It is the devolution of work, which has been carried out through Prisha Enterprises. There was no letter issued by the accused/applicant either self or through his company allocating sub tender. It is further contended that there was no forged letter issued but it was manufactured by the informant for the purpose of putting pressure on the applicant. Further submits that it was a purely commercial transaction wherein the FIR has been lodged and charge sheet is submitted. The applicant is having criminal history of two cases, wherein in one case final report is submitted and in one case stay order is in operation from the Writ Court. The accused applicant is languishing in jail since 31.10.2025. The trial is at nascent stage. He seeks to be enlarged on bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. for State and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail.

5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. Considering prima facie that there is commercial dispute between the parties in respect to the issuance of sub tender or not.The charge sheet is submitted and the trial is at nascent stage, the accused/applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

7. Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.

8. The accused/applicant 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 court concerned in view of observation made by the Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re [(2024)10SCC 685].

9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and speedy disposal. September 29, 2026 Abhishek Sri. BAIL No. 44926 of 2025 2 (Avnish Saxena,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK RANJAN SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad