Anil Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10528

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 42 of 2025

Applicant :- Anil Kumar Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Saddam Ahamad Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed today by learned Counsel for the State is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0404 of 2024, under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) of BNS, Police Station Gazipur, District Lucknow.

¶9

From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 20.01.2025, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:-

¶10

"Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶11

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 404 of 2024, under sections 318(4), 336(3), 338 and 340(2) BNS P.S.- Ghazipur District - Lucknow.

¶12

The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the allegation against the applicant is that he in collusion with the other beneficiaries uploaded the fake marksheets for getting registration in pharmacy counsel though, there is no cogent piece of evidence to support the version of prosecution. He added that the applicant has no criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph no. 7 of the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail application. He next submits that the applicant has always cooperated with the investigation proceedings and undertakes that he would never abscond from the same. He also submits that there is acute apprehension that the applicant will be arrested by the police thus, submission is that the the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.

¶13

Further submitted that the identically situated co-accused namely,

¶14

Sudhir Kumar, has already been granted interim protection by this court vide order dated 20-12-2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 266 of 2024 and the applicant is seeking parity of the same.

¶15

On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the submissions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is involved in committed offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail, but, he could not dispute the fact that identically situated co-accused named above, has already been granted interim protection by this court.

¶16

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, till the next date of listing, the present applicant-Anil Kumar Gupta, shall be released forthwith, in case of his arrest in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶17

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶18

(ii) that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶19

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶20

(iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶21

(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶22

(vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶23

(vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶24

Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2, returnable at an early date.

¶25

Steps be taken within a week.

¶26

If steps are taken, office shall proceed accordingly.

¶27

List/put up this matter in the Third Week of February,2025.

¶28

In the meantime, the State as well as opposite party no. 2 may file their counter affidavits . "

¶29

From perusal of the order dated 20.01.2025, it transpires that

¶30

State counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thoroughly considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceeding or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case.

¶31

In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Anil Kumar Gupta till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:-

¶32

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶33

(ii) that the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶34

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶35

(iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and

¶36

(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶37

In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this protection.

¶38

Order Date :- 17.2.2025 kkv/

¶39

Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Anil Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

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

Ajeet Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ram Chandra and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohd. Asraf @ Asraf Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Pappu Chauhan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Sugendra Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home U.P. Lko.

Rahul Dixit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.