Anubhav Mittal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Jul 2025BAIL/16081/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anubhav Mittal; bail granted; Criminal Misc. Bail Application 16081 of 2025; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad; Justice Krishan Pahal; Social trade.biz; Ablaze info Solution Pvt. Ltd.; Director; Case Crime No.256 of 2017; FIR 02.03.2017; Sections 420, 406 IPC; S.66 Information Technology Act; Police Station Ganganagar; District Meerut; custody since 25.01.2021; long incarceration; Rs. 57,500/-; 2025:AHC:118599; decided 21.7.2025.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant Anubhav Mittal on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions of non-tampering with evidence, non-intimidation of prosecution witnesses and appearance before the trial court on dates fixed; breach permits prosecution to seek bail cancellation before this Court.

Anubhav Mittal vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether applicant Anubhav Mittal is entitled to be released on bail in Case Crime No.256 of 2017 (Sections 420, 406 IPC and S.66 Information Technology Act, PS Ganganagar, District Meerut) during pendency of the trial, in light of his long incarceration in the present matter.

¶¶16

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the long incarceration of the applicant in the present matter, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail; accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶¶16

Ratio / Principle

Applicant to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions: (i) shall not tamper with evidence during trial; (ii) shall not pressurise/intimidate prosecution witnesses; (iii) shall appear before the trial court on dates fixed; on breach of any condition the prosecution may move an application before this Court for cancellation of bail.

¶¶17

Key takeaways

Clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of the bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.obiter¶¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Court No.65, Justice Krishan Pahal; neutral citation 2025:AHC:118599) allowed bail for applicant Anubhav Mittal in CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.16081 of 2025, decided 21.7.2025. Offence: Case Crime No.256 of 2017, Sections 420, 406 IPC and S.66 Information Technology Act, FIR lodged 02.03.2017 against Social trade.biz / Ablaze info Solution Pvt. Ltd., PS Ganganagar, District Meerut, informant having invested Rs. 57,500/- which was allegedly wholly misappropriated. Applicant, unnamed in the FIR, was arraigned in investigation as one of the Directors of the company; hundreds of FIRs stand lodged against the company and the applicant has already been bailed in a number of them. In custody in this matter since 25.01.2021, he was held entitled to bail principally on the ground of long incarceration, the application being allowed without any opinion on merits. Release ordered on personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, with conditions against tampering with evidence, pressurising/intimidating witnesses and absence from trial-court dates, breach permitting prosecution to seek cancellation before the High Court; observations expressly confined to the disposal of the bail application.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:118599

¶2

Court No. - 65

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16081 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Anubhav Mittal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Kumar Yadav,Virendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Sri Dileep Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Amit Kumar, learned State Law Officer for the State are present.

¶8

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.256 of 2017, under Sections 420, 406 IPC and 66 of Information Technology Act, Police Station Ganganagar, District Meerut, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶9

The FIR of the present case was lodged on 02.03.2017 against Social trade. biz Ablaze info Solution Pvt. Ltd. and according to the FIR informant invested Rs. 57,500/- in the company but his entire money has been misappropriated.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was not named in the FIR and during investigation due to the reason that he is one of the Directors of the Company, he has been made accused in the present matter. He further submitted that however, apart from the present case against the company, 100s of other FIRs were lodged and during investigation in all the cases applicant has also been made accused only being one of the Directors in the company but in number of cases, applicant has been released on bail.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant is in jail in the present matter since 25.01.2021. He is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on

¶12

bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

Per contra, learned State Law Officer opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶14

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶15

However, as per allegations applicant is one of the Directors in Social trade. biz Ablaze info Solution Pvt. Ltd. and his company duped the informant and hundreds of other common public and hundreds of FIRs were lodged against the company and it also appears that during investigation in all the cases, applicant has also been made accused but in number of cases, applicant has been released on bail.

¶16

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, particularly, long incarceration of the applicant in the present matter, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant- Anubhav Mittal 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:-

¶18

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial.

¶19

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

¶20

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶21

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.

¶22

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.

¶23

Order Date :- 21.7.2025

¶24

(Ravi Kant)

¶25

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶26

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anubhav Mittal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anubhav Mittal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Maiku vs State of U.P.

Lovsang Sering vs State of U.P.

Ashok Kumar Seth vs State of U.P.

Nitin Agarwal vs State of U.P.

Meeta Devi vs State of U.P.

Atiq vs State of U.P.