Allahabad High Court
VISHWADEEPAK BHARTI ALIAS GOVIND AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The court held that the accused, having no direct involvement in the alleged fraud and facing prolonged pre‑trial detention while the trial is at a nascent stage, are entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The accused Vishwadeepak Bharti (Govind) and Vikram Prasad applied for bail in a fraud case (Criminal No. 312 of 2024) alleging that they merely received a small credit in their accounts and had no direct involvement in the D.D. Finance scheme run by their cousin Upendra Nath. The FIR alleged duping of the informant of Rs. 4.42 crores, but the applicants argued that the main accused had already obtained anticipatory bail and that the trial was at a nascent stage with only two witnesses examined. The State opposed the bail, but the court noted the lack of direct role, the lengthy pre‑trial incarceration since September 2024, and the early stage of proceedings. Relying on Supreme Court dicta in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re, the court decided to enlarge bail. The applicants were released on personal bond and two sureties each, with a direction to cooperate for speedy disposal.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused, who allegedly had no direct role in the alleged fraud, are entitled to bail during the pendency of trial.
- Whether the early stage of the trial and prolonged pre‑trial detention justify granting bail.
- Whether the anticipatory bail granted to the main accused affects the bail application of the co‑accused.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 316(2), 318(4), 319(2)
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- fraud
- pre‑trial detention
- Uttar Pradesh
- criminal procedure
- surety
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25062 of 2025
Vishwadeepak Bharti Alias Govind And Another
.....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 applicants and
learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the accused applicants-
Vishwadeepak Bharti @ Govind and Vikram Prasad to enlarge him
on bail in Case Crime No. 312 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 applicants that the
FIR has been lodged by the informant with the allegation that the accused
applicants 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
applicants are only the cousin brothers of Upendra Nath @ Pintu and they
have 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
applicants 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
BAIL No. 25062 of 2025
2
show his complicity in the matter of duping the informant. The applicant
no.1 has ten cases criminal history, wherein in seven cases, he is on bail
and the applicant no.2 has nine cases criminal history, wherein in seven
cases, he is on bail. The applicants are in 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…