Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:93788 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17690 of 2025 Applicant :- Dinesh Chandra Gandhi Alias Dinesh Kumar Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Pandey,Sheshadri Trivedi,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Satish Trivedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Sheshadri Trivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Vashistha, Advocate holding brief of Sri Chhatresh Kumar, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.373 of 2024, under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) and 316(2) B.N.S., 2023, Police Station Bindki, District Fatehpur, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY: 5. The applicant is stated to have duped the informant to the tune of Rs.5 lakhs on the pretext that he shall give him Rs.50 per quintal extra to the MSP rate. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT: 6. The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. 7. The applicant is the owner of the said land and runs his own firm in the said property and also runs a Dharmkata (weighing bridge) on the same land. 8. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. The truth is that FIR No.343 of 2024 was instituted on similar lines against the applicant and co-accused persons and he was granted protection by this Court vide order dated 16.12.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.22702 of 2024. In the same night, the instant FIR has been instituted at 11:58 p.m. just to nullify the said order granted in favour of the applicant. 9. Subsequent to it, the applicant had appeared before the Investigating Officer for his statement and he was handed over in Supurdagi of his own brother. In the same night, false arrest of the applicant has been shown. Subsequent to it, FIR No.386 of 2024 has also been instituted against him. 10. No money has been transferred to the account of the applicant. The said allegations are per se false. 11. There is no trail of money which connects the applicant to the said offence. The money, if any, has been transferred to the wife of one of the co-accused person Umesh Gupta. 12. Much reliance has been on the account statements of certain persons, which have been filed with the bail application, thereby indicating false implication of the applicant. 13. The criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant stands explained vide supplementary affidavit filed today. The applicant is languishing in jail since 23.12.2024 and is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE/INFORMANT: 14. The applicant is a part of a larger net, in which he has duped several innocent farmers to the tune of Rs.6-7 crores, including the informant who has been duped of Rs.5 lakhs by him and has not returned a single penny to him. 15. The co-accused persons have simply been granted on the basis that they were not the proprietors of the said firm and the applicant is the proprietor of the said firm Dinesh Kumar Rajesh Kumar. 16. There is criminal history of four cases assigned to the applicant. 17. In rebuttal, learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has applied for bail in all those cases as all of them have been instituted in a chain of transactions. He has been enlarged on bail in a case of Trade Marks Act. CONCLUSION: 18. The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of U.P. And Another, 2020 (11) SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case for bail is made out. 19. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 20. Let the applicant- Dinesh Chandra Gandhi Alias Dinesh Kumar Gupta involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 21. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 22. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 30.5.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad