Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:19521 Court No. - 14 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 426 of 2025 Applicant :- Pradeep Gupta And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Swatantra Lata Yadav,Vinay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. 1. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C/528 B.N.S.S has been preferred with the following main prayers:- "1. To quash the impugned order (Annexure No. 1) dated 13.12.2024 so far it pertains to the applicants /petitioners herein, passed by Additional Principal Judge II, Family Court, District Barabanki in Criminal Misc. case No. 375/2021 (Sapna Gupta V/s Rakesh Kumar), u/s 125(3) Cr.P.C, in the interest of justice. 2. To quash the impugned order dated 19.12.2024 (Annexure No.2) pertains to the applicants, passed by Additional Principal Judge II, Family Court, District Barabanki in Criminal Misc. case No. 375/2021 (Sapna Gupta V/s Rakesh Kumar), u/s 125(3) Cr.P.C." 2. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was a surety in the bail order granted in favour of one Rakesh Kumar, who was granted bail when an undertaking was given by him that he will deposit the balance amount of Rs. 2, 40,000/- to his wife Sapna Gupta, in compliance of the order passed by the Additional Principal Judge II, Family Court, District Barabanki, under Section 125 Cr.P.C. 3. It is further submitted that Rakesh Kumar had not paid the sum of Rs. 2,40,000/- to Smt. Sapna Gupta and his bail was cancelled and the proceedings under Section 466 Cr.P.C has also been initiated against the applicant being a surety. 4. It is further submitted that the bail was cancelled for non-payment of Rs. 2,40,000/- by Rakesh Kumar to his wife Sapna Gupta and no surety was given by the applicant regarding the undertaking given by Rakesh Kumar for payment of Rs. 2,40,000/- to his wife. The applicant has given the surety only for the purposes of bail granted to the applicant. 5. On being asked learned counsel for the applicant to show the copy of the bail order and the bail bond, he has submitted that the same has not been filed alongwith the present application. The court asked him to fie the order of bail and bail bond by filing a supplementary affidavit, but the learned counsel for the applicant declined to file any supplementary affidavit bringing on record the bail order and the bail bond without looking into these documents, it cannot be said that the applicant had not stood surety for payment of the amount which submission has been made on his behalf. 6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A has submitted that the notice was issued under Section 466 Cr.P.C only and the applicant has an opportunity to place his grievance or case before the court concerned and no final decision has been taken yet. 7. Under these circumstances, the present application is dismissed. 8. However, it is open for the applicant to show cause to the notice issued under Section 466 Cr.P.C before the court concerned. Order Date :- 7.4.2025 DiVYa Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench