Anil vs State Of U.P.

1. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manmohan Singh, learned counsel for the first informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. This is a second bail application which has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 27 of 2025, under Sections- 406, 419, 420, 471, 467, 468 IPC, Police Station- Phephna, District- Ballia, during the pendency of the trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the first bail application of the applicant, being Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19441 of 2025, was rejected on 02.07.2025 on the ground that the applicant had misappropriated the money of the agency of the first informant and was also denied parity with the co-accused, Krishna Kumar Singh, on the ground that the applicant has a criminal history of three cases, while the co-accused, Krishna Kumar Singh, did not have any criminal history. It is further submitted that it is not a case of misappropriation of money but a case of accounting, and in the FIR this fact is admitted that the applicant and the co-accused have already deposited Rs. 10,92,000/-. In the statement of the first informant, it is admitted that the liability of the applicant is Rs. 8,64,914/-, and just to show bonafide, the applicant is paying Rs. 2,88,000/-, which is 1/3rd of the outstanding amount, through demand draft bearing No. 514145, dated 21.04.2026, issued by SBI, Allahabad High Court, which is being handed over to the counsel for the son (Aseem Shrinetra) of the first informant. A photocopy of the same is kept on record. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant will also return the remaining outstanding amount to the son of the first informant, as the first informant has already died, within six months from the date of his release from jail. The applicant is a law-abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 09.11.2024. In case he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant has submitted that if the applicant is ready to return the outstanding amount then he will not have nay objection to release the applicant on bail.

5. Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that the parties have settled the dispute amicably as the matter relates to the money transaction between them.

6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and taking into account overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial courts as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 as well as guideline of this Court in the case of Maya Tiwari Vs. State of U.P., 2024 SCC Online All 6765 regarding grant of bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

7. Let the applicant- Anil, involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-

i. 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.

ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed by him.

v. The applicant shall pay the remaining outstanding amount to the son of the first informant within a period of six months from the date of his release from jail, as per his undertaking.

8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

9. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

10. Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant as well as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.

11. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.

12. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure early release of the applicant.

13. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal within 24 hours in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685.

(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)

May 6, 2026

SA