HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9175 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Romit Seth, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Avishesh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and Sri Pramendra Kumar Singh, Advocate, who has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant, which is taken on record. 2. A supplementary affidavit has been filed by the learned counsel for the applicant, which is taken on record. 3. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No. 0108 of 2025, under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(2) Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (B.N.S.), registered at Police Station Jankipuram, District Lucknow. By means of a supplementary affidavit, it has been stated that Sections 351(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 612(a) B.N.S have been added against the applicant during investigation. 4. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 28.05.2025 against the applicant, his wife and two sons, stating that the informant's husband Sudhir Kumar Mishra was an old acquaintance of the applicant. The informant had entered into an agreement with the applicant's wife- co-accused Smt. Sunaina for running a petrol pump business, in which the informant was made to invest Rs. 54 Lakhs exceeding her share and thereafter when she demanded an account for the same, no account was rendered to her. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Romit Seth Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Pramendra Kumar Singh Ram Narain @ Ram Narain Trivedi .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) 5. In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is a 63 years old person and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant's involvement in three criminal cases has been disclosed in paragraph no.51 of the affidavit, in one of which, he has been acquitted and in other two cases, he has been ordered to be released on bail. 6. The learned AGA has pointed out involvement of the applicant in another case and it has been stated in the supplementary affidavit that the applicant has not received any summon in that case. 7. The applicant's wife- co-accused, Smt. Sunaina and his sons Abhishek and Ashish have already been granted anticipatory bail by means of orders dated 04.09.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.1151/2025, 1149/2025 and 1141/2025 respectively. 8. The learned A.G.A. has opposed the anticipatory bail application and he has submitted that the investigation in the matter is still going on. 9. The learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application and he has submitted that applicant is the main accused in the present case and he has committed the offence of cheating against the complainant. He further alleged that the applicant had forged some documents. 10. In the case of Sailesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of UP, Criminal Appeal No.2963 of 2025 decided on 14.07.2025, reported in 2025 INSC 869, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has deprecated the practice of using criminal proceedings as a substitute for civil remedies observing that money recovery cannot be enforced through criminal proceeding where the dispute is essentially civil. This judgement has been followed in the case of Anukool Singh Vs. State of UP and Anr. Criminal Appeal No.4250 of 2025 decided on 24.09.2025, in which, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that a dispute concerning payment of money is purely civil in character. 11. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the F.I.R substantially alleges that the complainant and the applicant's wife had entered into a partnership agreement to run a business; that the complainant claims to have invested BAIL No. 9175 of 2025 2 Rs. 54 Lakhs in the partnership business exceeding her share and she alleges that the applicant has not rendered account to her, which dispute is essentially of a civil nature and that the applicant is 63 years old person, he has been languishing in jail since 23.08.2025 whereas, all the other three co- accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. 12. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant- Ram Narain @ Ram Narain Trivedi before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two solvent sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the S.H.O./Court concerned, on the following conditions and subject to any other conditions that may be fixed by the Trial Court: (i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court. (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness 13. After the Court had passed the order, the learned counsel for the complainant gave an application for taking on record a copy of a non- bailable warrant dated 21.03.2024 issued against the applicant in Case Crime No.3692 of 2014 from the Court of Additional Civil Judge, Junior Division, Court No.5, Gaziabad. This application is not supported by any affidavit and this case is not included in the criminal history of the applicant provided by the learned AGA in the instructions. Moreover, the mere fact that a warrant has been issued against the applicant in some other matter will not make any difference on the view of this Court that the complainant has instituted BAIL No. 9175 of 2025 3 criminal proceedings in a dispute which is essentially of civil nature. September 25, 2025 V. Sinha BAIL No. 9175 of 2025 4 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench