Lavish Gupta And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 11428 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Lavish Gupta And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 October, 2025

Author: Sanjay Kumar Singh

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Singh

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:182244
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9973 of 2023   
 
   Lavish Gupta And Another    
 
  .....Applicant(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State of U.P. and Another    
 
  .....Opposite Party(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Applicant(s)   
 
:   
 
Atul Kumar Shahi, Jitendra Pal Singh Chauhan   
 
  
 
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A., Gaurav Kakkar, Nitin Agarwal   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 71
 
   
 
 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH, J.      

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record.

2. By means of this present anticipatory bail application, applicants Lavish Gupta and Gaurav Gupta, who are involved in Complaint Case No. 81 of 2023, Nitin Kumar Versus Saurabh Gupta and others, under Sections 323, 307, 504, 506 and 34 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali City, District Bijnor, seeks enlargement on anticipatory bail during the pendency of trial.

3. The applicants Lavish Gupta and Gaurav Gupta are brothers-in-law of the complainant, namely, Nitin Kumar.

4. On 18.09.2023, following order was passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court, which is quoted below:-

"1. Heard Sri Atul Kumar Shahi, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Gaurav Kakkar, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Pankaj Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Complaint Case No. 81 of 2023, under Sections 323, 307, 504, 506, 34 IPC, Police Station Kotwali City, District Bijnor, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.

3. As per prosecution story, the applicants are brothers-in-law of the complainant herein. There are several litigation going on between the parties since 2011 and in the present case, the applicants alongwith other co-accused persons, are stated to have assaulted the complainant on 24.12.2022 and even the applicant no. 2 is stated to have assaulted the complainant with a knife, thereby causing grievous injuries to him. The complaint was filed by the complainant on 3.1.2023.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicants were not named in the FIR. Learned counsel has next stated that the complaint case has been filed after a delay of ten days and there is no proper explanation of the said delay caused. It is next stated that the injury report is tainted one, as on an application moved by the applicants, an inquiry was set up by the Commissioner, Moradabad, and it was opined that the injury was simple in nature and was not dangerous to life. The injury report has been filed as Annexure-6 to the affidavit filed with the anticipatory bail application. It is also stated that the victims herein have been made accused. The matter was challenged before this Court by filing a petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. and was sent for mediation, whereupon the mediation proceedings failed and subsequent to it, the said petition was disposed of.

5. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicants to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. Investigation is going on as the charge-sheet has yet not been filed in the matter. The applicants are cooperating in the investigation and are ready to do so in future.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the informant has stated that there are fourteen injuries in all and the complainant had sustained grievous injuries to his chest. It is next stated that the applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail in light of the judgement of this Court passed in Shivam Vs. State of U.P. and Another, reported in AIROnline 2021 All 484, whereby the applicant had relinquished the opportunity granted u/s 482 Cr.P.C. It is further stated that there are previous criminal history of the applicants and they had earlier on also assaulted the complainant and had caused injuries to him. The said injury report dated 24.8.2019 has not been annexed with the affidavit filed with the present application.

7. Matter requires consideration.

8. In the event of arrest, the accused-applicants- Lavish Gupta and Gaurav Gupta shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned on the following conditions:-

(i) the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation as and when required;

(ii) the applicants 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; and

(iii) the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

9. As prayed, two weeks' time is granted to learned counsel for the informant to file counter affidavit. Learned AGA may also file counter affidavit within the said period.

10. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within a week, thereafter.

11. List this application on 20.11.2023 in the additional cause list.

12. Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case."

5.The aforesaid interim anticipatory bail order dated 18.09.2023 was further extended vide orders dated 28.11.2023, 02.04.2024, 22.04.2024, 23.05.2024 and lastly on 22.09.2025.

6. The complainant/opposite party no.2 has filed counter affidavit reiterating the prosecution case as mentioned in the complaint dated 03.01.2023.

7. Learned counsel for the complainant relying upon judgment of this Court in the case of Shivam Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in AIR Online 2021 All 484 submitted that since the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the complaint filed by the accused/applicants has been dismissed, therefore, this anticipatory bail application of the applicants is not maintainable and relief as sought for by means of present anticipatory bail application cannot be granted to the applicants.

8. In response, learned counsel for applicants relying upon judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kamlesh and another Versus The State of Rajasthan and Anr (arising out of SLP (Crl) No. 1530 of 2018 submitted that even after dismissal of the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. of the applicants, the instant anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is maintainable.

9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that trial proceeding, pursuant to the complaint filed by opposite party no.2 is not stayed by this Court, therefore, trial of the applicants is proceeding in which they are participating. The applicants have been granted interim anticipatory bail vide order dated 18.09.2023 and there is no allegation against them that they have misused the liberty of anticipatory bail in any manner.

10. In view of aforesaid judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kamlesh and another (supra), this Court is also of the view that anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr. P.C. is fully maintainable.

11. In view of the above, aforesaid interim anticipatory bail order dated 18.09.2023 is made absolute till conclusion of the trial, subject to following conditions :

(i) That the applicants shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court on each dates unless inevitable.

(ii) That the applicants 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 tamper with the evidence.

(iii) That the applicants shall not involve in any criminal activity.

(iv) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the concerned Court below will be at liberty to cancel the anticipatory bail of the applicants after recording reasons.

12. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed.

13. It is clarified that observations made in this order at this stage is limited to the purpose of determination of this anticipatory bail application only and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The concerned Court below shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions according to law on the basis of materials / evidences on record.

(Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.)

October 13, 2025

T.S.