Bharat Jain Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39115

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 549 of 2025

Applicant :- Bharat Jain Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Radhika Singh,Gokul Seth,Rishabh Raj,Vedant Bhargava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

As per the office report dated 8.7.2025, the notices to the complainant are served. However, none appears on behalf of the complainant.

¶7

Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶8

Heard Ms. Radhika Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶9

The present application under Section 438 Cr.PC./482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0005 of 2025, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S. Mahanagar, District Lucknow.

¶10

The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.5.2025 has passed the following order:-

¶11

"1. Heard Ms Radhika Singh along with Mr Vedant Bhargava, learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record.

¶12

2. This First anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.0005 of 2025, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S. Mahanagar, District Lucknow.

¶13

3. As per contents of FIR, the applicant along with co-accused allegedly obtained employment on the basis of fabricated 'O' Level certificate issued by National Institute of Electronic and Information Technology.

¶14

4. It is submitted that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the charges levelled against him and that in pursuance of such a preliminary finding recorded with regard to fabrication of said 'O' Level certificate, services of the applicant along with other such appointees were cancelled leading to filing Writ-A No.590 of 2022 by the applicant which was consolidated with Writ-A No.586 of 2022, Nitendra Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and others. It is submitted that the said petition was allowed by means of judgment and order

¶15

dated 14.11.2022 remitting the matter to the concerned authority to make a fresh determination with regard to establishing that petitioners therein never participated in the 'O' Level examination and that the certificates were never issued by them.

¶16

5. It is submitted that the present FIR has been lodged subsequent to the said judgment of this Court without indicating any such examination or investigation having been subsequently carried out. It is further submitted that the applicant does not have any previous criminal history but has grave apprehension of being arrested.

¶17

6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed anticipatory bail application with the submission that FIR has been lodged in fact in pursuance of directions issued by this Court when the applicant was unable to furnish any plausible explanation with regard to authenticity of the documents. It is however admitted that the applicant does not have any previous criminal history.

¶18

7. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, it appears that the aspect of application of 'O' Level certificate submitted allegedly by the applicant for the purposes of obtaining employment was subject matter of writ petition filed before this Court which allowed as indicated hereinabove. The FIR does not indicate any subsequent efforts for establishing genuineness of the said certificate in pursuance of directions issued by this Court. Admittedly the applicant does not have any previous criminal history. Therefore, this Court finds it to be a fit case for granting interim anticipatory bail.

¶19

8. Let the accused-applicant Bharat Jain as an interim measure be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶20

9. In the event of arrest, the accused-applicant shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on bail furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned on the following conditions:-

¶21

(i) That the accused-applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.

¶22

(ii) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection.

¶23

10. Issue notice to respondent no.2.

¶24

11. List this case on 09.07.2025 as fresh along with service report.

¶25

12. Objections may be filed in the meantime."

¶26

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been released on interim anticipatory bail after filing of the personal bonds and two sureties before the investigating officer. He has duly cooperated in the investigation. He has no previous criminal history. Charge-sheet in the case has already been filed. He has not misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail granted by this Court. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial and in case, he is enlarged on anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of same.

¶27

Learned A.G.A. on the basis of instructions has submitted that charge-sheet in the case has been filed on 26.06.2025.

¶28

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation so also the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history, charge-sheet in the case has already been filed, the applicant has not misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail granted by this Court coupled with the undertaking given by the applicant that he will cooperate in the trial as also the interim protection granted by this Court vide order dated 29.05.2025 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.

¶29

In view of the aforesaid, the anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶30

Order Date :- 9.7.2025 Shravan

¶31

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

Bharat Jain v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharat Jain v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vishal Maurya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Principal Secretary Lko.

Kuldeep Singh @ Kallu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Mohd. Tauseef Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Jitendra Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko.

Rajender Mandal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Homes Lko.

Smt. Manju Kaushal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.