Bhagauti Singh @ Bhagwati Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Govt. of U.P. Distt. Lko.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1262 of 2025

¶3

Bhagauti Singh @ Bhagwati Singh

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Govt. Of U.P. Distt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Siddhartha Sinha, Arun Sinha, Prakhar Kankan Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 23

¶8

HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J.

¶9

Rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶11

The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.11.2025 has passed the following order granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant:-

¶12

"1.The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.440F/2006 under sections 420, 467, 471, 120-B, 109, 468 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Nagar, district Raebareli.

¶13

2.Heard learned counsel for the applicant who has filed supplementary affidavit today in court, which is taken on record, and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶14

3.It is alleged in the prosecution case that the then Clerk of Sale Tax Department Umakant Awasthi and Bhagauti Singh, present applicant have made some interpolation in the challan of sales tax and a fake receipt was prepared by them showing more amount as deposited sales tax, thus, it is alleged that both the accused caused loss to the government revenue to the tune of Rs.10,075/-.

¶15

4.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a show cause notice was issued by the department to him way back in the year 2003, against which the applicant on 1.8.2009 has already deposited Rs.33,000/including the fine imposed. The DCR certificate dated 1.8.2009 is on record.

¶16

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that anticipatory bail application of the applicant was rejected on the pretext that the proceedings under section 82 CrPC were drawn against him and the

¶17

ABAIL No. 1262 of 2025

¶18

2

¶19

accused applicant is absconding. He has drawn attention of this court towards Annexure No.SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit showing that when the applicant applied for a certified copy of order under Section 82 CrPC vide Folio No.152 of 2025 dated 8.10.2025 he was informed by the concerned court that as on 16.10.2025, there is no such formal order issued by the court under section 82 CrPC. It is also informed that no charge sheet has been submitted before the concerned court. The applicant is 75 years old and is ailing. The applicant has explained criminal history of two cases in para 32 of the bail

¶20

application.

¶21

He further undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation.

¶22

5.Learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the prayer made by applicant's counsel and submits that the offence is of 1998. The proceedings under section 82 CrPC were initiated, firstly on 24.9.2007 and thereafter, on multiple times, reminder(s) and proceedings under section 82 CrPC have been issued. The applicant has not cooperated. Even, the court has granted opportunity to the accused applicant to surrender on the application of the applicant himself.

¶23

6.In rebuttal, learned counsel for the applicant submits that even the certified copy of the first information report has not been provided to the applicant and there is nothing on record before the trial court. The application of anticipatory bail has been rejected by the trial court on assumption and incorrect facts recorded in the C.D. regarding the court proceedings.

¶24

7.List on 13.1.2026. In the meantime, learned A.G.A. shall file objections/counter affidavit, also the relevant extract of case diary to substantiate his contention, which will also include the order(s) passed by the concerned court on the application (s) given by the investigating officer as is stated by him while opposite the prayer made by the applicant's counsel.

¶25

Let a report be also summoned from the concerned court, on above aspects.

¶26

8.Considering the above aspects of the matter, the fact that the matter pertains to the year 1998, the alleged loss is Rs.10,075/- to the State exchequer, the applicant is 75 years old and ailing. averments made in the supplementary affidavit, in the interest of justice, as also the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant protection to the applicant.

¶27

9.In view of the above, as an interim protection, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer/S.H.O.

¶28

The applicant shall report to the investigating officer within seven days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The investigating officer shall enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail, as directed above.

¶29

10.The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witnesses. The applicant shall not leave India sans previous permission of the Court.

¶30

In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to proceed in accordance with law/ to

¶31

ABAIL No. 1262 of 2025

¶32

3

¶33

move application for vacation of this order."

¶34

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 in compliance of the aforesaid order. He has duly cooperated in the investigation. Charge-sheet in the case has already been filed. He has not misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail granted by the 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.

¶35

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶36

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation so also the fact that charge-sheet in the case has already been filed, the applicant has not misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail granted by the Court coupled with the undertaking given by the applicant that he will cooperate in the trial, the interim anticipatory bail granted by the coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 17.11.2025 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.

¶37

It is made clear that during bail, in case the applicant commits any offence, the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶38

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

¶39

(Rajeev Bharti,J.)

¶40

March 9, 2026 Shravan

¶41

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

Bhagauti Singh @ Bhagwati Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Govt. of U.P. Distt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagauti Singh @ Bhagwati Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Govt. of U.P. Distt. Lko.

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

Sukhraj vs Union of India Thru. N.C.B. Zonal Unit Lko.

Rahul Kori vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko

Nidhi Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Homw Lko.

Ram Sajeevan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Vijay Pal Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Manju Dubey vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.