Mukesh Bansal and 2 Others vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42420 of 2025

Mukesh Bansal And 2 Others

.....Applicant(s)

	Versus
State of U.P.			.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Aushim Luthra, Advocate	Irshad	Husain, Sr.
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 64

¶5

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicants on bail in Case Crime No. 446 of 2025, under Sections 318(2), 318(4), 61(2), 111, 341(1) B.N.S., Police Station Nai Mandi, District Muzaffar Nagar, during the pendency of the trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant no. 1 is the Proprietor of M/s Taj Medico, 17, Mubarak Mahal, Fountain, Agra. The applicant no. 2 is the Proprietor of M/s MSV Medi Point Private Limited, Shop No. 2905/7-8, Hospital Road, Fountain, Agra. The applicant no. 3 is the Proprietor of M/s Bansal Medical Agency, 3, Gogiya Market, Fountain Jauhari Bazar, Agra. The said firms have the licence to sell, stock or exhibit (or offer) for sale, or distribute by wholesale Drugs specified in Schedules C and C(1) excluding those specified in Schedule X. The firm of applicants purchased the aforesaid drugs from M/s Meenakshi Pharma and M/s Amman Pharma. The payments of the alleged drugs were made through RTGS. All the medicines so procured were through E-Way bills and GST invoices. The said drugs were thereafter sold to M/s Ayush Medicos. M/s Ayush Medicos has the licence to sell or stock the alleged drugs. There is no material at this stage to suggest that the alleged drugs were spurious or of sub-standard quality. It is next contended that the applicants are not members of any organized crime syndicate nor they acted on behalf of such syndicate. The essential

¶9

BAIL No. 42420 of 2025

¶10

2

¶11

ingredients to constitute the alleged offence are not made out. It is next contended that the co-accused Tarun Girdhar has been granted bail by this Court vide order date 26.11.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.39702 of 2025. Criminal history of the applicants has been explained in para no.25 of the bail application. The applicants are in jail since 31.08.2025 and if they are released on bail, they will not misuse the said liberty.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶13

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that the firms of the applicants had the licence to sell, stock or exhibit (or offer) for sale, or distribute by wholesale Drugs specified in Schedules C and C(1) excluding those specified in Schedule X. At this stage there is no substantive evidence against the applicants. The co-accused Tarun Girdhar has been granted bail by this Court. Moreover, the applicants have remained confined for more than three months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicants, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Let the applicants- Mukesh Bansal, Sohit Bansal and Sanjay Bansal , involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that they:

¶15

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶16

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

¶17

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶18