Allahabad High Court
VISHWADEEPAK BHARTI ALIAS GOVINDversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The bail application is allowed; the accused is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Vishwadeepak Bharti (alias Govind) in a criminal case (Crime No. 313 of 2024) involving alleged financial fraud under Sections 319(2), 318(4) and 316(2) of the BNS. The applicant contended that he was merely a cousin of the alleged mastermind, Upendra Nath @ Pintu, had no direct role in the D.D. Finance firm, and that only a small amount was credited to his account at the direction of the co‑accused. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the allegations and the applicant’s prior criminal history. The court noted that the trial was at a nascent stage, only two witnesses had been examined, and the applicant had been in custody since September 2024. Relying on the principles laid down in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and related Supreme Court dicta, the court granted bail on personal bond and sureties, without addressing the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused, who allegedly received a small credit in his account, should be granted bail despite the seriousness of the fraud allegations.
- Whether the stage of the trial and the applicant’s prior criminal history justify denial of bail.
- Whether the existence of anticipatory bail for the co‑accused influences the bail decision for the applicant.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 316(2), 318(4), 319(2)
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- financial fraud
- trial stage
- criminal procedure
- Uttar Pradesh
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24843 of 2025
Vishwadeepak Bharti Alias Govind
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Aman Arya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Aman Arya, learned counsel for accused applicant and
learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Vishwadeepak Bharti Alias Govind to enlarge him on bail in Case
Crime No. 313 of 2024, under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 316(2) of BNS,
P.S.- Belipar, District- Gorakhpur during the pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for accused applicant that the
FIR has been lodged by the informant with the allegation that the accused
applicant and other co-accused have duped the informant of crores of
Rupees by assuring that their money be invested in land and property
through D.D. Finance. It is further alleged that nearly Rs.4.42 crores have
been invested by the informant in D.D. Finance. It is further contended
that D.D. Finance is owned by Upendra Nath @ Pintu. The accused
applicant is only the cousin brother of Upendra Nath @ Pintu and he has
no role in D.D. Finance, which deals with Real Estate. It is further
contended that some amount is credited in the account of accused
applicant from the account of informant. It was not as an investment but it
was credited to the account at the instance of co-accused Upendra Nath @
Pintu. It is further contended that the main accused Upendra Nath @
Pintu, who is proprietor of D.D. Finance, has already been granted
anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court. There is nothing on record to
show his complicity in the matter of duping the informant. The applicant
BAIL No. 24843 of 2025
2
has ten cases criminal history, wherein in seven cases, he is on bail. The
applicant is languishing in jail since 20.9.2024. The trial is still at the
nascent stage. He seeks enlargement of accused on bail.
3A. This Court in order dated 20.8.2026 called for the status report of the
trial. The report dated 19.9.2026 reveals that two witnesses have been
examined so far and the cross examination of P.W.2 is still continuing.
4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considering that the accused applicant has no direct role in D.D.
Finance, only small amount is credited in his account; the trial is at the
nascent stage and long incarceration, the accused applicant is entitled to
be enlarged on bail.
7. Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is
allowed.
8. The accused/applicant be released on bail in the aforesaid case on
furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of court concerned in view of observation made by the
Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in
re [(2024)10SCC 685].
9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and
speedy disposal.
(Avnish Saxena,J.)
September 29, 2026
Krishna*
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHNA KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…