Prashant Gupta vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Another

Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for opposite party-State. Notice to opposite party no.2 stands dispensed with. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

First anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to case crime No.317 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, District Sitapur.

As per contents of first information report which has been lodged against one Grish, it has been alleged that during the course of application for GST Registration, it transpired that the firm for which GST Registration was being sought did not in fact conduct any business operations and that documentation produced by the nominated person for purposes of registration for GST were forged.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that he has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him and a perusal of FIR will indicate that main gist of allegations is against the person nominated therein namely, Girish. It is submitted that applicant's name has been shown as involved only on the basis of alleged confessional statement of the said person. It is also submitted that earlier applicant has been granted anticipatory bail where the trial court during the course of investigation in which he participated and cooperated whereafter charge- sheet has been filed but non-bailable warrant was issued only on account of the fact that applicant did not receive any summons. It is submitted that there is no direct or indirect evidence against the applicant. Previous criminal history has already been explained.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed anticipatory bail application but admits on the basis of instructions that applicant cooperated during the course of trial and was not required to be arrested.

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it appears that the applicant is not named in the FIR and has been included only on the basis of alleged confessional statement of the main accused Girish. It has also admitted that applicant cooperated during the course of trial and had also been granted anticipatory bail by trial court which was not misused.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the liberty of the applicant may be protected till filing of police report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. 8. In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant- Prashant Gupta shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid Case Crime number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned with the following conditions:- (i) 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; (ii) that the applicant(s) shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iii) that the applicant(s) shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (iv) that the applicant(s) shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (v) that in case of breach of any of the above

It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

The application stands allowed. Order Date :- 17.4.2025 Subodh/- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench