HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 207 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. The matter is listed under the heading 'FOR REFERRAL TO THE SPECIAL MEDIATION DRIVE - MEDIATION FOR THE NATION' but as the learned counsel for the complainant is not present, the matter cannot be referred for mediation. 2. Heard Sri Shbham Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shekhar Srivastava, learned AGA for the State. Although the cause list shows name of Sri Chandan Tiwari as learned counsel for the complainant, neither he is present to assist the Court nor there is any request for adjournment of the case on his behalf. 3. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No. 0425/2024, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 409 IPC, Police Station Sushant Golf City, District Lucknow. 4. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on20.08.2024 against 12 persons, including the applicant, describing him as a board member of the company, stating that the complainant had been called to a seminar held in a hotel in September, 2021 where CEO of the company-co-accused Sameer Keshari and other board members were present. She was told about a plan regarding Ruby currency which would become Bitcoin in future. The complainant purchased rube currency worth Rs. 10,90,000/- in numerous transactions but she was not given any return on her investments. 5. In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. 6. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of the material collected during investigation. The applicant has filed a rejoinder affidavit. 7. Learned AGA has stated that a non bailable warrant has been issued against the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shubham Gupta, Suresh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Chandan Tiwari Mansij Kumar Rai @ M.K. Rai. .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) applicant. He has pointed out that it has been stated in the counter affidavit that an application has been submitted before the trial court for issuance of a non bailable warrant against the applicant. 8. Learned counsel for the complainant has stated that in case the applicant is granted anticipatory bail he will not cooperate in the investigation/trial. 9. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that although the applicant is named in the FIR, there is no specific allegation of commission of any act by him and he has been implicated in the present case merely he is a board member of the company in which the complainant has made investments and that the applicant has no criminal history, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail. 10. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant- Mansij Kumar Rai @ M.K. Rai before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and two solvent sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of 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 themselves 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. October 6, 2025 Pradeep/- ABAIL No. 207 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench