High Court · 2025

1. Despite time granted to the learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant, no counter affidavit has been filed by them.

2. Heard Sri Gopal Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Somya Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State, and Sri Aditya Vishal Chaurasiya, Advocate holding brief of Sri D.S. Khan, learned counsel for the informant, and perused the material placed on record.

3. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.05.2024. The order is quoted herein below: "1. Heard Sri G.S. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms.Somya Chaturvedi and Sri Sanjeev Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant; counsel for the complainant; Sri Vishwa Deepak Mishra, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in Complaint Case No.5685 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 392, 504, 506, 120-B, I.P.C., P.S. Kavinagar, District Ghaziabad, during pendency of investigation.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Instant complaint has been lodged after one year of the incident. The learned Magistrate called a report from the police concerned. The police submitted a report dated 17.11.2022 stating that applicant and complainant are engaged in business deal and the address given in the complaint, is wrong as the applicant is not residing at the given address. It has been next submitted that the learned Magistrate despite knowing that applicant is not residing on that address, issued notice and initiated proceedings against the applicant. There is no evidence against the applicant to prove his involvement in the present case. Instant case is squarely covered under section 438 Cr.P.C. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would co-operate with the investigation. Applicant has definite apprehension of his arrest by the police.

4. Learned counsel for the complainant is granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks' time thereafter.

5. List this case immediately after expiry of the aforesaid period.

6. As an interim protection, till the next date of listing fixed for hearing on this application, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned Court with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required; (ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P./C.P./A.C.P concerned.

7. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/Govt. Advocate/concerned court is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant."

4. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that pursuant to the interim order dated 16.05.2024 the applicant had furnished bail bonds before the concerned court and is appearing before the court on the dates fixed. The applicant has not violated any conditions nor has misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail. It is next contended that a purely commercial dispute between the parties has been given colour of a criminal case. The applicant was an employee of the company known as Bisleri International Pvt. Ltd. The complainant was the distributor of the said company. The agreement of distributorship was cancelled by the company and co-accused Pawan Sharma was appointed as distributor. Consequent thereto, the instant prosecution has been instituted only for the purposes of harassment. The applicant had not robbed the complainant. Further, there are inconsistencies in the statements of the complainant under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. It is contended that the said inconsistencies discredit the prosecution case. At this stage there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. In case the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, for the reasons contained in the interim order dated 16.05.2024 and, in particular, the fact that the applicant is appearing before the trial court on the dates fixed, the case is purely civil in nature and also the fact that no adverse material has been produced by the learned AGA or learned counsel for the complainant and at this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

7. In the event of arrest, the applicant- Udit Kumar Agrawal, involved in Complaint Case No. 5685 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 392, 504, 506, 120B I.P.C., Police Station Kavinagar, District Ghaziabad, be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a fresh personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall make himself available on each and every date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court; (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the concerned court.

8. Further, in default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

9. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 12.5.2025 SKT/- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Despite time granted to the learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant, no counter affidavit has been filed by them.

2. Heard Sri Gopal Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Somya Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State, and Sri Aditya Vishal Chaurasiya, Advocate holding brief of Sri D.S. Khan, learned counsel for the informant, and perused the material placed on record.

3. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.05.2024. The order is quoted herein below: "1. Heard Sri G.S. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms.Somya Chaturvedi and Sri Sanjeev Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant; counsel for the complainant; Sri Vishwa Deepak Mishra, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in Complaint Case No.5685 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 392, 504, 506, 120-B, I.P.C., P.S. Kavinagar, District Ghaziabad, during pendency of investigation.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Instant complaint has been lodged after one year of the incident. The learned Magistrate called a report from the police concerned. The police submitted a report dated 17.11.2022 stating that applicant and complainant are engaged in business deal and the address given in the complaint, is wrong as the applicant is not residing at the given address. It has been next submitted that the learned Magistrate despite knowing that applicant is not residing on that address, issued notice and initiated proceedings against the applicant. There is no evidence against the applicant to prove his involvement in the present case. Instant case is squarely covered under section 438 Cr.P.C. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would co-operate with the investigation. Applicant has definite apprehension of his arrest by the police.

4. Learned counsel for the complainant is granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks' time thereafter.

5. List this case immediately after expiry of the aforesaid period.

6. As an interim protection, till the next date of listing fixed for hearing on this application, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned Court with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required; (ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P./C.P./A.C.P concerned.

7. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/Govt. Advocate/concerned court is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant."

4. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that pursuant to the interim order dated 16.05.2024 the applicant had furnished bail bonds before the concerned court and is appearing before the court on the dates fixed. The applicant has not violated any conditions nor has misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail. It is next contended that a purely commercial dispute between the parties has been given colour of a criminal case. The applicant was an employee of the company known as Bisleri International Pvt. Ltd. The complainant was the distributor of the said company. The agreement of distributorship was cancelled by the company and co-accused Pawan Sharma was appointed as distributor. Consequent thereto, the instant prosecution has been instituted only for the purposes of harassment. The applicant had not robbed the complainant. Further, there are inconsistencies in the statements of the complainant under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. It is contended that the said inconsistencies discredit the prosecution case. At this stage there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. In case the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, for the reasons contained in the interim order dated 16.05.2024 and, in particular, the fact that the applicant is appearing before the trial court on the dates fixed, the case is purely civil in nature and also the fact that no adverse material has been produced by the learned AGA or learned counsel for the complainant and at this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

7. In the event of arrest, the applicant- Udit Kumar Agrawal, involved in Complaint Case No. 5685 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 392, 504, 506, 120B I.P.C., Police Station Kavinagar, District Ghaziabad, be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a fresh personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall make himself available on each and every date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court; (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the concerned court.

8. Further, in default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

9. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 12.5.2025 SKT/- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad