HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36344 of 2025 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed, today in Court, on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State- respondents and perused the record. 3. This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant Akshya Gupta seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.211 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) B.N.S., Police Station Civil Lines, District Meerut. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused-applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in this case. Applicant is languishing in jail since 22.8.2025. It is submitted that the applicant is not the actual beneficiary of so called fraudulent transaction and the main accused in the present case is Vishal Verma. It is further submitted that the applicant is not the executor, purchaser or marginal witness of the sale deed but his role and involvement is only of a stamp seller and as per the attested photocopy of the sale deed available on record the applicant has not sold the e-stamp instead name of one Akash Vashishth has been affixed on the e-stamp in the present case. It is argued that Rajeev Kumar Garg and Sanjeev Garg are the executor of the sale deed in question and as per the FIR as well as statement of informant/victim Vishal Verma is the real beneficiary in the present case. It is lastly submitted that applicant has criminal history of five cases which have been explained in para 32 of the bail application as well as in para 3 of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Nitin Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Akshya Gupta .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) the supplementary affidavit. Submission is that the conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for. 5. Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail but could not dispute the aforesaid submission. 6. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the paragraph no.53 of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2024, (SC) LawSuit 677 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that:- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC/269 BNS. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of BNSS is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC/209 of BNS. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the BAIL No. 36344 of 2025 2 dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 of B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 7. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 8. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. October 17, 2025 RA BAIL No. 36344 of 2025 3 (Santosh Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAZIQ ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad