Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:46716 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 12312 of 2024 Applicant :- Kamal Surendra Chugha Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pankaj Bharti Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Bharti, learned counsel for the complainant as well as Sri V.P.Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State, and perused the material placed on record. 2. This application under Section 482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Complaint Case No. 28516/9 of 2022 (Arun Kumar Vs. Kamal Surendra Chugha), under Section 420 I.P.C., pending before the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Muzaffar Nagar. 3. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant and the complainant were engaged in a business transaction since 2017. The amount outstanding against the applicant was paid from time to time by him. A commercial dispute between the parties, has been given colour of a criminal case to harass the applicant. The ingredients of offence are not made out against the applicant. At this stage there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has been summoned by the concerned court. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case and in case, the applicant is released on anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. for the State and the counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, in particular the fact, that the applicant and the complainant were engaged in a business transaction since 2017, the amount outstanding against the applicant was paid from time to time, a commercial dispute exists between the parties, at this stage there is no substantive evidence against the applicant, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 6. In the event of arrest, the applicant Kamal Surendra Chugha involved in the aforesaid complaint case be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a 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 him 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. 7. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same. 8. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 3.4.2025 Lbm/- Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad