High Court

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present application under Section 438 Cr.PC./482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 168 of 2024, under sections 409,420,467,468,471,506 of IPC P.S.- Gomti Nagar Extension, District- Lucknow. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 09.01.2025, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- " Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Rajesh Chandra Mishra, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 168 of 2024, under sections 409,420,467,468,471,506 of IPC P.S.- Gomti Nagar Extension, District- Lucknow. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He further submits that the role of the present applicant is to the extent that he allured the victim to make investment in Suvidha Foundation and the victim has deposited the amount of Rs. 50 lakhs in the account of one Viraj Dave @ Viraj Trivedi and no amount has ever been credited in the account of the present applicant. He added that the applicant is not the beneficiary of the alleged offence which is said to be committed by the applicant including the other co-accused persons. Further submitted that the dispute, if any, is commercial in nature and the FIR has been lodged so as to mount pressure on the applicant and the co- accused persons. He also submitted that there is no mens rea for the applicant to commit the alleged offence. Next submitted that the FIR has been lodged after about two years and no plausible explanation has been given. He argued that the applicant has four cases criminal history which has been explained in the anticipatory bail application. He further submits that there is apprehension that the applicant will be arrested by the police thus, submission is that the the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the submissions aforesaid and submitted that the applicant is named in the FIR and he has played major role in committing the offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, till the next date of listing, the present applicant- Samir Kumar Jitendrabhai Sharma shall be released forthwith, in case of his arrest in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. In compliance of the order dated 3.1.2025, Shri Amarkant Tyagi, Investigating Officer concerned is present before this Court. His personal appearance is hereby exempted. List/put up this matter in the week commencing 10.2.2025. In the meantime, the State as well as the learned counsel for the complainant may file their counter affidavits. " State counsel has failed to demonstrate from the counter affidavit 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 thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceedings or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Samir Kumar Jitendrabhai Sharma till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this order. Order Date :- 12.3.2025 Shravan

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present application under Section 438 Cr.PC./482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 168 of 2024, under sections 409,420,467,468,471,506 of IPC P.S.- Gomti Nagar Extension, District- Lucknow. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 09.01.2025, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- " Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Rajesh Chandra Mishra, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 168 of 2024, under sections 409,420,467,468,471,506 of IPC P.S.- Gomti Nagar Extension, District- Lucknow. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He further submits that the role of the present applicant is to the extent that he allured the victim to make investment in Suvidha Foundation and the victim has deposited the amount of Rs. 50 lakhs in the account of one Viraj Dave @ Viraj Trivedi and no amount has ever been credited in the account of the present applicant. He added that the applicant is not the beneficiary of the alleged offence which is said to be committed by the applicant including the other co-accused persons. Further submitted that the dispute, if any, is commercial in nature and the FIR has been lodged so as to mount pressure on the applicant and the co- accused persons. He also submitted that there is no mens rea for the applicant to commit the alleged offence. Next submitted that the FIR has been lodged after about two years and no plausible explanation has been given. He argued that the applicant has four cases criminal history which has been explained in the anticipatory bail application. He further submits that there is apprehension that the applicant will be arrested by the police thus, submission is that the the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the submissions aforesaid and submitted that the applicant is named in the FIR and he has played major role in committing the offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, till the next date of listing, the present applicant- Samir Kumar Jitendrabhai Sharma shall be released forthwith, in case of his arrest in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. In compliance of the order dated 3.1.2025, Shri Amarkant Tyagi, Investigating Officer concerned is present before this Court. His personal appearance is hereby exempted. List/put up this matter in the week commencing 10.2.2025. In the meantime, the State as well as the learned counsel for the complainant may file their counter affidavits. " State counsel has failed to demonstrate from the counter affidavit 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 thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceedings or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Samir Kumar Jitendrabhai Sharma till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this order. Order Date :- 12.3.2025 Shravan