Rohit Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case called out. Learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State are present. No one appeared on behalf of private opposite party no.2. This Court on 18.02.2026 observed that "It is also made clear that on the next date of listing, if the service is found sufficient and no one appears to oppose the present anticipatory bail application on behalf of the opposite party No.2, then in that eventuality the case would not be adjourned and an appropriate order would be passed on first call including an order adversarial to the opposite party No.2. In these circumstances, the Court proceeded to decide the case finally.

¶11

Counter affidavit filed by the State is taken on record.

¶12

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned AGA for the State of U.P. and perused the material placed on record.

¶13

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant in relation to FIR/Case Crime No.0421 of 2024 under Sections 287, 105 B.N.S., Police Station - Dubagga, District - Lucknow.

¶14

Vide order dated 04.02.2026, this Court had protected the interest of the applicant. The order dated 04.02.2026, referred, reads as under:-

¶15

"1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the

¶16

NABAIL No. 226 of 2026

¶17

2

¶18

record.

¶19

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant in relation to FIR/Case Crime No.0421 of 2024 under Sections 287, 105 B.N.S., Police Station - Dubagga, District - Lucknow.

¶20

3. For the purposes of entertaining the present application and protecting the interest of the applicant, this Court considered the facts as indicated including that,

¶21

(i) The applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case;

¶22

(ii) The land alongwith the structure thereon, owned by the applicant and his brothers, namely Mohit and Shobhit, all sons of co-accused Sushil Kumar Gupta, was rented out to Geeta Gas Agency situated at Lucknow. The aforesaid land was purchased through registered sale deed dated 18.08.2022 and same was being used as godwon by the Geeta

¶23

Gas Agency.

¶24

(iii) On 06.12.2024, a fire broke out in the said structure/godwon and, due to the blast, the real brothers of the applicant, namely Mohit and Shobit as well as Shomnath Vishwakarma (son of the informant, namely Yogendra Kumar) and Sanjeet alias Ranjit sustained burn injures. All the injured persons were admitted and died during treatment at King George Medical University (K.G.M.U)

¶25

(iv). Co-accused namely, Sushil Kumar Gupta has been released on bail by the learned Sessions Judge, Lucknow (in short 'trial court') vide order dated 29.10.2025 passed in Bail Application (U/S 482 B.N.S.S.) No. 8500 of 2025 (Sushil Kumar Gupta Vs. State of U.P.).

¶26

4. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial.

¶27

5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer made by applicant's counsel.

¶28

6. Taking note of the aforesaid, this Court finds that the interest of the applicant is liable to be protected.

¶29

7. Accordingly, as an interim measure, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the accused-applicant -Rohit Gupta be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of Station House Officer of the Police Station/Court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶30

(i) That the accused-applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by police authorities as and when required and will cooperate with the investigation;

¶31

(ii) That the accused-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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; and

¶32

(iii) That the accused-applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

¶33

8. Issue notice to the opposite party No.2 returnable at an early date. Steps to be taken within three working days.

¶34

9. List/put up this case on 18.02.2026, in top 20 cases along with service report.

¶35

10. In the meantime, learned A.G.A. shall file counter affidavit. "

¶36

NABAIL No. 226 of 2026

¶37

3

¶38

The learned counsel appearing for the prosecution could not demonstrate from the record that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail after considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the prosecution also could not point out any fact based upon which it can be inferred that the applicant has not cooperated with the investigation proceedings or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case.

¶39

In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant- Rohit Gupta till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:-

¶40

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶41

(ii) that 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶42

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶43

(iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and

¶44

(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶45

In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this order.

¶46

(Saurabh Lavania,J.)

¶47

March 10, 2026

¶48

Arti/-

¶49

Digitally signed by :- ARTI MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rohit Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Hanoman Prasad Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Shobh Nath Tiwari and 7 Others vs Sri Vijay Kanaujiya Engineer Chief Public Works Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Pradeep vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Chandra Mauli Bhardwaj vs Smt. Mala Srivastava IAS Secy. Deptt. of Geology and Mining Lko. and Another

Shiva Ji vs Sri Naveen Khandelwal Presently Posted Divisional Director Social Forestry Division Sitapur

Mohd. Shamim vs Shakil Ahmad