Shiv Gopal Sharma and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8646 of 2025

¶3

Shiv Gopal Sharma And Another

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashutosh Kumar, Jai Prakash Prasad Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 72

¶7

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶8

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicants is taken on record.

¶9

Heard Shri Ashutosh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri B.P. Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶10

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no.475 of 2015, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 of IPC, Police Station Barra, District Kanpur Nagar, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶11

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that this is the second anticipatory bail application of the applicants and the first anticipatory bail application was rejected by this Court and now in the changed facts and circumstances of the case, the second anticipatory bail application has been filed. It is further submitted that as per first information report, the applicant is said to have received Rs.70,000/- on the false promise of securing a government job to the first informant and both the applicants are husband and wife and they have returned the said amount through a cheque, which was dishonored and cases under Section 138 N.I.Act were lodged against the applicants, which has resulted in their acquittal. It is further submitted that as per entire order sheet of the learned trial Court, the charge sheet in this case has not been submitted against the applicants and only the co-accused

¶12

NABAIL No. 8646 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

Gagan Srivastava is facing trial before the learned trial Court. It was also submitted that applicants undertake to co-operate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶15

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and it has been submitted by him that the first anticipatory bail application of the applicants was rejected by this Court.

¶16

In reply, learned counsel for the applicants submits that in the changed facts and circumstances of the case and since the applicants have been acquitted under Section 138 N.I. Act, the second anticipatory bail applicant can be granted.

¶17

The applicant no.1 is said to have received Rs.70,000/- from the first informant on the false promise of securing a government job and applicant nos.1 and 2 both have returned the said amount through a cheque, which was dishonoured and cases under Section 138 N.I. Act were lodged by the first informant against the applicants, which has resulted in their acquittal. It is further submitted that the first anticipatory bail application was rejected by this Court on 09.11.2025, whereas the acquittal in the year 2024. It is further submitted that the investigation of the case is still under progress.

¶18

It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 , it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶19

In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is

¶20

NABAIL No. 8646 of 2025

¶21

3

¶22

made out.

¶23

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶24

In the event of arrest of the applicants - Shiv Gopal Sharma and Smt. Neha Sharma involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, with the following conditions :-

¶25

(i) The applicants shall not tamper with evidence and that they would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned;

¶26

(ii) The applicants 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶27

(iii) The applicants would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶28

(iv) The applicants shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned.

¶29

In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

¶30

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶31

December 1, 2025 RKM

¶32

Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shiv Gopal Sharma and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Gopal Sharma and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Durgesh Kumar Rai @ Vikky vs State of U.P. and Another

Tara Datt vs State of U.P. and Another

Amit Kumar Chaudhary vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Kasif vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashok Kumar Garg vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Kumar Upadhyay vs State of U.P.