Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82799 Court No. - 68 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11131 of 2025 Applicant :- Anubhav Mittal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Kumar Yadav,Virendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Dileep Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anil Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State- respondents and perused the record. 2. This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Anubhav Mittal, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 167 of 2017, under Sections 420, 406 IPC and 66 I.T. Act, Police Station Medical, District Meerut. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused- applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this case crime number and is languishing in jail since 04.11.2020. He has criminal antecedent of one case, which has been explained in para 21 of the affidavit, and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no direct or indirect evidence against the applicant, the aforesaid company has been closed due to seizer by the E.D. and after seizer company is unable to pay the amount to their customer and when the amount has not been received and working of the company has been closed the customer has made present FIR against the company and being the director of the company, the applicant has been charge sheeted by the investigating officer in the present case. When the account of the company has been seized by the E.D., the company has become incapable to make payment or transfer the money to his customers from account of the company. It is argued that the investigating officer has submitted charge sheet against the applicant without any credible evidence. It is next argued that since 2017, about three hundred cases have been lodged against the company and during investigation being a director of the company applicant has also charge sheeted and he has no criminal history earlier to 2017. Hence, bail has been prayed for. 5. Learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. 6. Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the accused-applicant, Anubhav Mittal, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence. ii. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity. iii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial. iv. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. 9. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. Order Date :- 15.5.2025 v.k.updh. Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad