IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOs. OF 2025 (@ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) Nos.3052-3053/2025)

RAVINDRA SINGH ...APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS STATE OF U.P. & ANR. ….RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R Leave granted.

These appeals challenge the order dated

29.08.2024 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 1958 of 2024 and final order dated 17.10.2024 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 2341 of 2024 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow.

Apprehending arrest in connection with crime registered pursuant to FIR No. 40 of 2022 lodged Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by with P.S. Masauli, District Barabanki, in respect NEETU SACHDEVA Date: 2025.04.25 Reason:

of the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420, 406, 506, 467, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code 1860, the appellant preferred an application before the High Court seeking anticipatory bail in terms of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code” for short).

Said application for anticipatory bail has been rejected by the High Court vide the impugned order dated 29.08.2024. Thereafter, the appellant preferred second application before the High Court seeking anticipatory bail which has also been rejected by the High Court vide the impugned order dated 17.10.2024.

Hence, instant appeals have been preferred.

By order dated 21.02.2025, while issuing notice, this Court granted interim protection in favour of the appellant.

We have heard learned counsel for the appellant in support of the appeal(s) and learned counsel for the respondent(s)/State.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that out of ten accused persons, four accused persons have been charge-sheeted and five accused persons have been discharged. Out of four charge-

sheeted accused, one has been granted anticipatory bail and three have been granted regular bail; that the appellant herein is in fact an employee of the Company, although designated as a Director. In the circumstances, the appellant may be granted the relief on the principle of parity by setting aside the impugned order(s).

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent(s)/State submitted that there is no merit in these appeals; that the High Court has rightly declined to grant the relief of anticipatory bail to the appellant herein. Although, the appellant has not been charge- sheeted yet, the investigation is on and the appellant is not cooperating with the investigation. Hence the appeals may be dismissed.

Considering the circumstances on record, in our view, the appellant is entitled to the relief claimed under Section 438 of the Code.

We, therefore, allow these appeals and set aside the orders passed by the High Court dated 29.08.2024 and 17.10.2024. We direct that in the event of arrest of the appellant, the Arresting Officer shall release the appellant on bail subject to furnishing cash security in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand only)

with two like sureties.

It is directed that the appellant shall extend complete cooperation in the ensuing investigation. The appellant shall not misuse his liberty and shall not in any way influence the witnesses or tamper with the material on record.

With the aforesaid directions, the criminal appeals are allowed.

………………………………………J. [B.V. NAGARATHNA]

NEW DELHI ….……………………………………J. APRIL 25, 2025 [K.V. VISWANATHAN]

ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.7 SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos.3052-3053/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29-08-2024 in CRMABA No. 1958/2024 17-10-2024 in CRMABA No. 2341/2024 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench]

RAVINDRA SINGH Petitioner(s)

VERSUS STATE OF U.P. & ANR. Respondent(s)

IA No. 41860/2025 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 41863/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.

Date : 25-04-2025 This matter was called on for