Disposed

Harendra and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC13 Nov 2025NABAIL/8828/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad granted interim anticipatory bail to Harendra and Durgesh Bhardwaj in a case involving cheating and criminal breach of trust, subject to a personal bond and specific conditions. The direction to file criminal history affidavit was also issued.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail granted on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties till 9.12.2025.

Harendra and Another vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8828 of 2025

¶3

Harendra And Another	Versus .....Applicant(s)
State Of U.P. And 2 Others	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Satyendra Narayan Singh, Vikas Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶4

Court No. - 72

¶5

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶6

1. Heard Sri Vikas Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Shiv Dutt Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

2. Present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 996 of 2017, under Sections 406, 420, 506 IPC, Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail.

¶8

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants are innocent and they have an apprehension that the may be arrested in the abovementioned case. He further submits that no offence is made out against the applicants. It is further submitted that co-accused Mukesh has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 12.11.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 482 BNSS No. 8672 of 2025. It is submitted that the co-accused Mukesh has been attributed to the role of receiving earnest money on the false promise of executing the sale deed but the said sale deed was not executed. It is submitted that the applicants are not having any role in the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the applicant is having criminal history, which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit. 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

¶9

NABAIL No. 8828 of 2025

¶10

¶11

investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶12

On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submitted that the applicant no. 1 is having criminal history of one case and the applicant no. 2 is having criminal history of 02 cases.

¶13

5. 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, the 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.

¶14

6. Considering the above submissions of the learned counsel for the applicants and without expressing any opinion on merits, the applicants- Harendra and Durgesh Bhardwaj involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on interim 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 till 9.12.2025 with the following conditions :-

¶15

(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;

¶16

(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;

¶17

(iii) The applicants would cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of interim interim anticipatory bail bail.

¶18

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

¶19

7. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to

¶20

NABAIL No. 8828 of 2025

¶21

¶22

file appropriate application for cancellation of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicants herein.

¶23

8. List this case as fresh on 9.12.2025.

¶24

9. In the meantime, learned counsel for the applicants may file supplementary affidavit bringing on record the entire criminal history of the applicants.

¶25

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶26

November 13, 2025

¶27

Abhishek

¶28

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Harendra and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harendra and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Gaurav vs State of U.P.

Amit Verma vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Javed Alias Raja vs State of U.P.

Sunny Rohilla vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Lekhraj Sharma and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Pushpendra Prajapati vs State of U.P. and 2 Others