Ashutosh Ravishankar Upadhyay v. State Of Maharashtra

1 902-ABA 3244-25.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3244 OF 2025 Ashutosh Ravishankar Upadhyay ... Applicant V/s.

State of Maharashtra ... Respondent ----- Mr. Sushil S. Upadhyay a/w Shailaja Chaturvedi i/by Minakshi Mishra for the Applicant.

Mr. V. N. Sagare, APP for the Respondent-State. PSI Nitin Kamble, Pairavi, Amboli PS is present. ----- CORAM :

N.R. BORKAR, J.

DATE :

14TH JANUARY 2026 P.C. :

1.

This is an Application for anticipatory bail. 2.

The Applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No.890 of 2025 registered with Amboli Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 340(2) and 336(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3.

It is the case of the prosecution that the present Applicant represented to the first informant that the Government of Uttar Pradesh has appointed him as a member in the planning committee of Kumbh Mela at Prayagraj. He further assured the first informant that he would help the agency of the first informant to acquire the event management work at Kumbh Mela. It is alleged that on the basis of the said

2 902-ABA 3244-25.doc representation, the Applicant induced the first informant to pay him an amount of Rs.12,80,000/-. It is further alleged that the Applicant thereafter forwarded a official letter of the Director of Tourism, Government of Uttar Pradesh, thereby appointing the first informant's agency for the event management work. Subsequently, the first informant realised that the said official letter was forged and that the present Applicant had defrauded him to the tune of Rs.12,80,000/-. Accordingly, the present crime was registered.

4.

I have heard Learned Counsel for the Applicant and Learned APP for the Respondent-State.

5.

Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is willing to return the amount of Rs.12,80,000/- to the first informant. It is submitted that there is no need of custodial interrogation and the Applicant is ready and willing to cooperate in the investigation. It is further submitted that the alleged forged document was forwarded to him by some other person.

6.

On the other hand, Learned APP for the Respondent-State submits that the Applicant is involved in a serious offence of cheating and forgery. It is submitted that considering the nature of crime, the Applicant may not be released on anticipatory bail.

7.

The Applicant has defrauded the first informant to the tune of Rs.12,80,000/- by making false representation that the Government of

3 902-ABA 3244-25.doc Uttar Pradesh has appointed him as a member on a planning committee for the Kumbh Mela. Apart from it, there is nothing to show that the alleged forged document was forwarded to the present Applicant by some other person. Considering the nature of crime, I am not inclined to release the Applicant on Anticipatory Bail. Hence, the Anticipatory Bail Application is rejected.

(N.R. BORKAR, J.)