Gaurav Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

Gaurav Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted for a limited period: in the event of arrest, the applicant to be released till cognizance is taken on the police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C., on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions (availability for interrogation; no inducement/threat/promise; no departure from India without permission and deposit of passport), with liberty to seek cancellation on breach; Investigating Officer directed to conclude investigation expeditiously and independently.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, Gaurav Kumar Sharma, is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in Case Crime No. 16 of 2014. +1 more

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, and considering the nature of accusation, the applicant's antecedents and the second surge of the novel coronavirus pandemic, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail for a limited period, considering the exceptions considered by the Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi).

Ratio / Principle

In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail till cognizance is taken by the Court on the police report, if any, under section 173(2) Cr.P.C., on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer/concerned Court.

Key takeaways

The anticipatory bail is subject to conditions: the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation as and when required; shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to dissuade disclosure of facts; and shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court, depositing his passport (if any) before the concerned S.S.P./S.P.ratio¶13
In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/Govt. Advocate is at liberty to file an appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail – Section 438 Cr.P.C. – Allahabad High Court (Siddharth, J.) allowed the application of Gaurav Kumar Sharma in Case Crime No. 16 of 2014 (Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 120-B, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Rauza, District Shahjahanpur) on the ground of parity, co-accused having already been granted anticipatory bail by the Court. Without expressing opinion on merits, and considering the nature of accusation, antecedents and the second surge of the COVID-19 pandemic, the applicant was held entitled to release on anticipatory bail for a limited period, applying the exceptions considered in Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. Bail granted till cognizance on the police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount, subject to standard conditions, with liberty to apply for cancellation on default; Investigating Officer directed to conclude investigation expeditiously and independently.