Back
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, N. V. ANJARIA
Saurabh Agrawal – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
Key Points: - The appeal is allowed; anticipatory bail granted by the High Court is cancelled. (!) (!) (!) - The case involves alleged large-scale financial fraud related to residential property, with allegations of inducement and subsequent transfer to a third party. (!) (!) - The High Court’s reasoning was found to rely on peripheral factors (abroad co-owner, notarization, partial payment, civil dispute) not directly relevant to anticipatory bail, and failed to consider criminal antecedents and investigation needs. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) - The Court emphasized that civil remedies (refund demand) do not preclude criminal proceedings where a criminal offense is prima facie made out. (!) - The Court noted the presence of serious criminal antecedents and the need for a fair and effective investigation, which were not adequately considered by the High Court. (!) (!) - The matter concerns whether anticipatory bail should be denied in a case of economic offence involving substantial sums and deliberate conduct leading to transfer of property. (!) - The decision reiterates that anticipatory bail is not warranted at this stage given the nature of the allegations and investigation circumstances. (!)
JUDGMENT :
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This Appeal arises out of the impugned order dated 06.10.2025 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench1[For short, ‘High Court’] in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. 812 of 2025, by which anticipatory bail has been granted to Respondent No. 2 – Monika Dwivedi in connection with FIR No. 0002 of 2025 dated 03.01.2025 registered under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120-B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Aggrieved by the grant of such protection, the complainant-Saurabh Agrawal has approached this Court seeking its cancellation.
3. The FIR dated 03.01.2025 came to be lodged by the complainant alleging a large-scale financial fraud in relation to a residential property bearing C-24, E-Park, Mahanagar Extension, Lucknow, which was represented to be jointly owned by Respondent No. 2, her son Abhishek Dwivedi, and her daughter Abhilasha Dwivedi.
4. According to the complainant, acting on such representation, he entered into an agreement to sell dated 08.01.2024, which was notarized, fixing the total sale consideration at Rs. 4,30,00,000/-. A sum of Rs. 3,55,00,000/- was
Anticipatory bail cannot be granted in cases of large-scale financial fraud.
The court considered the pending civil suit and the petitioner's cooperation with the investigation in granting anticipatory bail.
The power of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. is to be exercised in exceptional cases, and custodial interrogation may be necessary for effective investigation in certain cases.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that allegations, even if true, may constitute a civil liability rather than a criminal offense, and the pendency of a civil suit for specific perf....
Anticipatory bail can be granted even when Non-Bailable Warrants are issued, depending on the specifics of the case and the applicant's willingness to cooperate with the investigation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the grant of anticipatory bail is not warranted when the accused persons are alleged to have cheated multiple parties and have a modus operand....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
