High Court · 2025

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Vivek Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the complainant/opposite party No. 2 as well as perused the record.

3. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 06.05.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lucknow in Bail Application No. 2917 of 2025, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 425 of 2020, under Sections- 409, 420, 120-B IPC and Sections- 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station- P.G.I., District- Lucknow.

4. While pressing the present appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the FIR in issue i.e. FIR/Case Crime No. 425 of 2020 lodged by the opposite party No. 2 on 02.07.2020 at Police Station- P.G.I., District- Lucknow against Ajeet Gupta, Smt. Niharika Singh, Sri Anjani Kaushal and Pradeep Sala making allegations therein so as to attract the offences as indicated under Sections 409, 420, 506, 504, 323 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act is the basis of pending criminal proceedings against the appellant and others.

5. It is further stated that the name of appellant surfaced during investigation and after due investigation, the Investigating Officer (in short "IO) dropped the name of accused/Smt. Niharika Singh. Thereafter, Ajeet Kumar Gupta, Pradeep Singh, Anjani Kaushal, Om Shankar Kaushal, Basudev Goswami, Smt. Neelam Kaushal, Smt. Manju Kaushal, Ashish Tiwari (appellant) and Dharmendra Kaushal were charge sheeted.

6. It is also stated that main accused/Ajeet Kumar Gupta @ Ajeet Gupta was the Director of Anee Bullion And Industries Pvt. Ltd. (Eye Vision India Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.) (in short "Company") and as certain amount deposited in the said Company by the informant could not be returned back, he lodged the FIR in issue implicating various persons including the appellant (employee of the Company) whose name surfaced during investigation.

7. It is further stated that during pendency of the criminal proceedings before the competent court of jurisdiction, the dispute related to the amount deposited by the informant in the Company was settled and in terms of the said settlement arrived at between the parties, the criminal proceedings qua the accused/Ajeet Kumar Gupta @ Ajeet Gupta and Anjani Kaushal have already been quashed by this Court vide order dated 11.02.2025 passed in Application U/S 482 No. 1259 of 2025 (Ajeet Kumar Gupta @ Ajeet Gupta and another vs. State of U.P. and 3 others).

8. It is further submitted that in the aforesaid background of the case, the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appellant, who is having no criminal history and is languishing in jail since 13.09.2021, is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

9. Learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 opposed the prayer for bail, however, they could not dispute the aforesaid contentions of counsel for the appellant.

10. Considered the submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and all the relevant documents placed on record.

11. Upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A., F.I.R., impugned order, period of incarceration and that the appellant was not named in the FIR as well as that the criminal proceedings qua main accused/Ajeet Kumar Gupta @ Ajeet Gupta have already been quashed by this Court in terms the settlement and chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case, this Court finds that the present appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, it is allowed.

12. Order dated 06.05.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lucknow in Bail Application No. 2917 of 2025, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 425 of 2020, under Sections- 409, 420, 120-B IPC and Sections- 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station- P.G.I., District- Lucknow is hereby set aside.

13. Let the appellant- Ashish Tiwari be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (v) The appellant 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. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

14. In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law

15. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation(s) made in this order. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 Arun/- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Vivek Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the complainant/opposite party No. 2 as well as perused the record.

3. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 06.05.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lucknow in Bail Application No. 2917 of 2025, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 425 of 2020, under Sections- 409, 420, 120-B IPC and Sections- 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station- P.G.I., District- Lucknow.

4. While pressing the present appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the FIR in issue i.e. FIR/Case Crime No. 425 of 2020 lodged by the opposite party No. 2 on 02.07.2020 at Police Station- P.G.I., District- Lucknow against Ajeet Gupta, Smt. Niharika Singh, Sri Anjani Kaushal and Pradeep Sala making allegations therein so as to attract the offences as indicated under Sections 409, 420, 506, 504, 323 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act is the basis of pending criminal proceedings against the appellant and others.

5. It is further stated that the name of appellant surfaced during investigation and after due investigation, the Investigating Officer (in short "IO) dropped the name of accused/Smt. Niharika Singh. Thereafter, Ajeet Kumar Gupta, Pradeep Singh, Anjani Kaushal, Om Shankar Kaushal, Basudev Goswami, Smt. Neelam Kaushal, Smt. Manju Kaushal, Ashish Tiwari (appellant) and Dharmendra Kaushal were charge sheeted.

6. It is also stated that main accused/Ajeet Kumar Gupta @ Ajeet Gupta was the Director of Anee Bullion And Industries Pvt. Ltd. (Eye Vision India Credit Cooperative Society Ltd.) (in short "Company") and as certain amount deposited in the said Company by the informant could not be returned back, he lodged the FIR in issue implicating various persons including the appellant (employee of the Company) whose name surfaced during investigation.

7. It is further stated that during pendency of the criminal proceedings before the competent court of jurisdiction, the dispute related to the amount deposited by the informant in the Company was settled and in terms of the said settlement arrived at between the parties, the criminal proceedings qua the accused/Ajeet Kumar Gupta @ Ajeet Gupta and Anjani Kaushal have already been quashed by this Court vide order dated 11.02.2025 passed in Application U/S 482 No. 1259 of 2025 (Ajeet Kumar Gupta @ Ajeet Gupta and another vs. State of U.P. and 3 others).

8. It is further submitted that in the aforesaid background of the case, the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appellant, who is having no criminal history and is languishing in jail since 13.09.2021, is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

9. Learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 opposed the prayer for bail, however, they could not dispute the aforesaid contentions of counsel for the appellant.

10. Considered the submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and all the relevant documents placed on record.

11. Upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A., F.I.R., impugned order, period of incarceration and that the appellant was not named in the FIR as well as that the criminal proceedings qua main accused/Ajeet Kumar Gupta @ Ajeet Gupta have already been quashed by this Court in terms the settlement and chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case, this Court finds that the present appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, it is allowed.

12. Order dated 06.05.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lucknow in Bail Application No. 2917 of 2025, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 425 of 2020, under Sections- 409, 420, 120-B IPC and Sections- 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station- P.G.I., District- Lucknow is hereby set aside.

13. Let the appellant- Ashish Tiwari be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (v) The appellant 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. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

14. In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law

15. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation(s) made in this order. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 Arun/- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench