Allahabad High Court

SUMIT GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Decided: 29 September 2026
Bench: RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant because the FIR lacks specific allegations against him, he has no criminal antecedents, and similarly situated co‑accused have been granted bail.

Summary

The applicant, Sumit Gupta, filed an anticipatory bail application in Crime No. 383 of 2026, alleging false implication in a case involving the alleged preparation of fake Inter State Transit Passes (ISTP) that caused revenue loss to the State. The FIR listed 23 accused but did not specifically allege any wrongdoing by the applicant, and co‑accused Mustafa and Bheem Priya Bhanu had previously been granted anticipatory bail in similar matters. The State opposed the bail but did not dispute the factual submissions. The court noted the lack of direct evidence against the applicant, his clean criminal record, and the precedent of bail to similarly situated co‑accused, and therefore granted anticipatory bail subject to standard conditions. The order emphasized that the bail is granted solely for the anticipatory bail application and does not constitute an opinion on the merits of the case.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail despite the FIR naming him among 23 accused without specific allegations.
Whether the precedent of granting anticipatory bail to similarly situated co‑accused warrants granting bail to the applicant.

Legislation cited

B.N.S., 2023 — s. 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
false implication
fake ISTP
criminal procedure
bail conditions
B.N.S. 2023

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 10195 of 2026

Sumit Gupta
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sr. Advocate, Umesh Chandra Shukla,
Vipul Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 71
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicant and Learned A.G.A. for the
State as well as perused the record.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicant in Case Crime No. 383 of 2026, under Sections 318(4), 338,
336(3), 340(2) and 61(2) of the B.N.S., 2023, Police Station- Baghpat,
District Baghpat, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the
applicant apprehends his arrest in the abovementioned case.

3. The Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant
has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegation is of the
STF arresting four accused, recovering a laptop, mobile phones and some
cash with the allegation that the said accused were preparing fake royalty
(ISTP- Inter State Transit Pass) which was causing revenue loss to the
State Government. The Learned counsel for the applicant has further
contended that the mobile phone of one of the accused, Talib, was
checked by the police in which allegedly one message regarding one ISTP
had allegedly been sent to the applicant about a year prior to the arrest.
The Learned counsel for the applicant has also contended that except the
said material, there is no other direct evidence against the applicant. The
Learned counsel for the applicant has lastly contended that the FIR has
been lodged against 23 accused persons. Similarly situated co-accused
Mustfa and Bheem Priya Bhanu have been granted anticipatory bail by
NABAIL No. 10195 of 2026
2

this Court in NABAIL Nos. 8115 of 2026 and 9851 of 2026. The case of
the applicant stands on a similar footing.

4. The learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail,
but does not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel
for the applicant.

5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for
the parties.

6. The FIR has been lodged against 23 named accused persons with no
specific allegation against the applicant. Similarly situated co-accused
Mustfa and Bheem Priya Bhanu have been granted anticipatory bail. The
case of the applicant stands on a similar footing. Applicant has no
criminal antecedents.

7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it
appropriate to enlarge applicant on anticipatory bail.

8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant
is allowed.

9. In the event of the arrest of the applicant- Sumit Gupta, he shall be
released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on
furnishing a personal bond and surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station/Court
concerned with the following conditions:-

i. the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police
officer as and when required;

ii. that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as
to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police
officer;

iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission
of the Court;
NABAIL No. 10195 of 2026
3

iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
witness;

10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned
shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

11. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively
for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be
considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case.

(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
September 30, 2026
Kushal

Digitally signed by :-
KUSHAL AGRAWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…