Kunal Anilkumar Gupta vs. The State Of Maharashtra And Anr

Held

The Court held that an anticipatory bail application is maintainable even prior to the lodging of an FIR if the applicant can demonstrate a genuine apprehension of arrest based on a complaint, relying on the Sushila Aggarwal judgment. Regarding the merits, the Court found that the complaint, supported by GST bills and accounts, indicated transactions of cloth material worth Rs. 1,98,51,265/- between December 10, 2022, and January 16, 2023. The applicant's issuance of dishonoured cheques for the outstanding balance, coupled with two prior FIRs with identical allegations of cheating using the same modus operandi, prima facie indicated an intention to cheat from the inception. The substantial amount involved and the applicant's past criminal antecedents led the Court to conclude that it was not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail in exercise of discretion under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The application was rejected.

Facts

The applicant, Kunal Anilkumar Gupta, sought anticipatory bail apprehending arrest following a complaint filed by Narendra Ramnivas Bajaj, power of attorney holder for Gopal Yarna Traders. The complaint, dated March 16, 2026, led to a notice under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The applicant claimed the dispute was civil, stemming from business transactions in 2022-2023 where Rs. 1,23,00,000/- remained due. The complainant and the State argued that the applicant induced them with a fraudulent export license, received cloth material worth Rs. 1,98,51,265/- between December 10, 2022, and January 16, 2023, with Rs. 1,23,72,661/- outstanding. Thirty-three dishonoured cheques were issued for the balance. The applicant also allegedly cheated banks and had prior FIRs for similar conduct.

Key Issues

1. Is an anticipatory bail application maintainable prior to the filing of a First Information Report (FIR) when the applicant apprehends arrest based on a complaint? (Question of law, relying on Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi)). Petitioner's Argument: Yes, an anticipatory bail application is maintainable even before an FIR is lodged if the applicant demonstrates a genuine apprehension of arrest based on a complaint, citing the Supreme Court's Constitution Bench judgment in Sushila Aggarwal. Revenue/State's Argument: The anticipatory bail application is not maintainable as an FIR has not yet been filed. 2. Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail in light of the allegations of cheating and the applicant's criminal antecedents? (Question of mixed law and fact, concerning the intent to cheat and the application of Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023). Petitioner's Argument: The dispute is civil in nature, given a criminal colour to extract money. The applicant is making efforts to repay the outstanding amount and has no criminal antecedents other than two prior FIRs. The applicant is ready to abide by any conditions. Revenue/State's Argument: There is prima facie material showing the applicant's intention to cheat from the inception, evidenced by a fraudulent export license, dishonoured cheques, and prior FIRs with identical modus operandi. The amount involved is substantial, and the applicant has profited from the cheated material. Therefore, the application should be rejected.