Prashant Kumar Sharma vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

Prashant Kumar Sharma vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim anticipatory bail till 17.12.2025 on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to specified conditions; final decision deferred, matter listed fresh for 17.12.2025 with A.G.A. directed to seek instructions.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, Prashant Kumar Sharma, should be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in Case Crime no. 177 of 2024 under Sections 420, 406, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Bhelupur, District Varanasi.

Court's answer

Interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant till 17.12.2025 on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to four conditions: (i) no tampering with evidence and appearance before the trial Court on dates fixed unless exempted; (ii) no direct or indirect inducement, threat or promise to dissuade any person acquainted with the facts from disclosing them to the Court or police; (iii) co-operation during trial and no misuse of the liberty of bail; (iv) no leaving India without prior permission of the Court concerned.

Ratio / Principle

In default of any of the imposed conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to file an appropriate application for cancellation of the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant; the case is to be put up afresh on 17.12.2025 and the learned A.G.A. is directed to seek instructions in the meantime.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Hon'ble Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J.) granted INTERIM ANTICIPATORY BAIL till 17.12.2025 to Prashant Kumar Sharma in Case Crime No. 177 of 2024 under Sections 420, 406, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Bhelupur, District Varanasi, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount. Counsel contended the charge-sheet was already filed, notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. was served during investigation, and the matter concerned a civil dispute and monetary transactions; the learned A.G.A. had received no instructions and was directed to seek them. Relying on Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, the Court conditioned the release: no tampering with evidence and appearance before the trial Court; no inducement, threat or promise; co-operation during trial and no misuse of bail liberty; no leaving India without prior permission. On default, the prosecution may seek cancellation; matter put up afresh on 17.12.2025.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9360 of 2025

Prashant Kumar Sharma

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Anil Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 72

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

Heard Sri Anil Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.D. Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 177 of 2024 under Section 420, 406, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Bhelupur, District Varanasi with the prayer that in the event of arrest, the applicant may be released on bail.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that charge-sheet in this case has already been submitted and the applicant was served with notice u/s 41-A of Cr.P.C. during investigation. It is further submitted that matter relates to some civil dispute and some monetory transactions. It is also submitted that applicant has no criminal history to his credit. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court and in case he is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. submits that he has not received instructions in the matter as yet.

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

NABAIL No. 9360 of 2025

2

nature and gravity of accusation, antecedents of the accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate the entire available material against the accused carefully and the exact role of accused has also to be taken into consideration.

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, let the applicant Prashant Kuamr Sharma in the event of his arrest, be released on interim anticipatory bail till 17.12.2025 on his 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:-

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

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

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

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

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

Put up this case as fresh on 17.12.2025.

In the meantime, learned AGA is directed to seek instructions in the matter.

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

November 20, 2025 Vibha Singh

Digitally signed by :- VIBHA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad