Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 19665 of 2021 Applicant :- Nitin Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Raja Ullah Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Nitin Gupta with a prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.869 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 482, 272, 273 I.P.C. & 63/65 Copyright Act, Police Station Baradari, district Bareilly.
Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P., hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A. as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U. P. Amendment) is not required.
The First Information Report of this incident was got lodged by police/opposite party no.2 against four named persons including the applicant. It was alleged in the first information report that they received an information that some persons were manufacturing fake gutkha and when the police raided the premises then they arrested co-accused Anil Sharma at the spot while other co-accused persons, namely, Dinesh Pandit, the applicant, Nitin Gupta and Sachin Gupta succeeded to ran away from the place of incident. It was also alleged that the police recovered 50kg. of fake gutkha, and machines used in the manufacturing of fake gutkha.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He submitted that first information report has been lodged just to tarnish the image of the applicant with an object to injure the reputation of the applicant by having him so arrested. He submitted that no proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. have been initiated against applicant. He submitted that charge sheet has not been filed till date. He submitted that applicant undertakes to cooperate during investigation and he will not tamper with the evidence in any way.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submitted that there are prima-facie allegation against the applicant and other co- accused persons of manufacturing fake gutkha and the police arrested co- accused Anil Sharma from the place of incident. He submitted that the police recovered 50 kg. of fake gutkha and the machines used in the manufacturing of fake gutkha. He submitted that the applicant had indulged in such type of activities earlier also, one such criminal case is pending against him as Case Crime No.1056 of 2021. He submitted it is not a case of malicious prosecution of the applicant in the present case, hence the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the material on record, considering the antecedents of the applicant, considering the gravity of offence, considering the possibility of the applicant to flee from justice where the acquisition has been made with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by having him so arrested and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find it a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, the anticipatory bail is rejected.
Order Date :- 23.12.2021 R./