Allahabad High Court

DIVYA SHARMA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME U.P. LKO.

Decided: 28 July 2026
Disposal: Consigned to Record
Bench: SUBHASH VIDYARTHI

Holding

The court allowed the interim bail application, finding the case fit for bail without expressing a view on the merits.

Summary

The applicants, Divya Sharma and Abhijeet Sharma, filed a bail application in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1114 of 2025 concerning Crime No. 397 of 2024, wherein they were charged under Sections 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code for alleged cheating and criminal breach of trust. They contended that they were falsely implicated, had already repaid Rs. 50,000 of the alleged amount and were ready to repay the remaining Rs. 3,06,000 within a month, and that mens rea was absent. The State opposed, asserting that ample evidence linked the applicants to the offence. The High Court, after considering the nature of the accusation, severity of punishment, prima‑facie evidence, the constitutional guarantee of liberty under Article 21, and the reformative theory of punishment, held that the case was fit for bail without expressing a view on the merits. Consequently, the court granted interim bail on personal bond and two sureties per applicant, imposing conditions such as non‑tampering with evidence, mandatory attendance at specified trial stages, and repayment of the balance amount. Non‑compliance would lead to cancellation of bail and further proceedings under the relevant provisions of the IPC and CrPC.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted in a case involving offences under Sections 409 and 420 IPC considering the nature of the accusation, evidence and the constitutional right to liberty.
Whether the applicants' offer to repay the alleged amount and the alleged absence of mens rea affect their eligibility for bail.
What conditions may be imposed under the Criminal Procedure Code to ensure the applicants' compliance while on bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 313, 82
Constitution of India — s. Article 21
Indian Penal Code — s. 174, 229, 409, 420

Subjects

bail
interim bail
Section 409 IPC
Section 420 IPC
Criminal breach of trust
cheating
Article 21
Criminal Procedure Code
sureties
repayment
trial attendance

Judgment

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:9111

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1114 of 2025

Applicant :- Divya Sharma And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home U.P.
Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kr. Chaudhary,Amar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

Supplementary affidavit filed today by the counsel for the
applicant is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the
State and perused the record.

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicants with the prayer to release them on bail during the
trial in Case Crime No. 397 of 2024, under Sections 409,420
IPC, Police Station- Safdarganj, District- Barabanki.

Contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the
applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the
instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that
admittedly, the applicants had taken the amount of Rs.
3,56,000/- and no offence has been committed by them as mens
rea is missing. He next submits that the bonafide of the
applicants is apparent as they have already repaid back Rs.
50,000/- to the person concerned and they are ready to repay
back Rs. 3,06,000/- within a period of one month from the date
of their release. He further submits that the applicants have
properly explained their criminal history in the bail application
as well as in the supplementary affidavit filed today and they
are languishing in jail since 17.12.2024. He also submits that
the applicants undertake that in case, they are granted bail, they
will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in
the trial proceedings.

Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed
the contentions aforesaid and submits that there is ample
evidence against the applicants that they were involved in
committing the aforesaid offence and thus, they are not entitled
for any relief.

Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal
of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicants are
languishing in jail since 17.12.2024 and the criminal history has
been explained in the bail application as well as in the
supplementary affidavit filed today coupled with the fact that
the applicants are ready to repay back the rest of the amount of
Rs. 3,06,000/- to the person concerned and they have
undertaken that if they are granted bail, they will not misuse the
liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial
proceedings.

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides,
nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of
conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie
satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative
theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the
Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing
any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of
bail.

Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

Let the applicants- Divya Sharma and Abhijeet Sharma
involved in the aforementioned crime be released on interim
bail, on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each
in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned,
with the following conditions:-

(1) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or
otherwise during the investigation or trial;

(2) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that
they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for
evidence when the witnesses are present in court. They shall
remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either
personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence,
without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against
them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

(3) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the
trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii)
framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section
313 Cr.P.C.; and

(4) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial
and in order to secure their presence proclamation under
Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear
before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial
court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with
law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be
verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of
the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to
cancel the bail and send the applicants to prison.

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly
confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be
construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

It is provided that if the applicants fail to pay the amount of
Rs. 3,06,000/- to the person concerned within one month
from the date of their release from jail, they shall surrender
before the C.J.M. concerned who would proceed against
them in accordance with law.

List/put up this matter on 18.03.2025.

In the meantime, learned AGA may file counter affidavit.

Order Date :- 12.2.2025
Shravan

Digitally signed by :-
SHRAVAN KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad,
Lucknow Bench

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…