Anil Gupta @ Anil Kumar Gupta vs The State Of Bihar on 3 July, 2026

    0
    2
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Patna High Court – Orders

    Anil Gupta @ Anil Kumar Gupta vs The State Of Bihar on 3 July, 2026

    Author: Ashok Kumar Pandey

    Bench: Ashok Kumar Pandey

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41309 of 2026
                           Arising Out of PS. Case No.-181 Year-2026 Thana- RUPASPUR District- Patna
                     ======================================================
                     Anil Gupta @ Anil Kumar Gupta Son of Sudesh Kumar Gupta @ Sudesh
                     Gupta Resident of Asco Bhawan, 4, Jalandhar Road, Patel Nagar, P.S.-
                     Kapurthala, District- Kapurthala, State- Punjab, At present- Flat No. 102,
                     Pushpanjli Apartment, Vasant Vihar Colony, Boring Road, P.S.- Budha
                     Colony, Patna, Bihar.
                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
               1.     The State of Bihar
               2.     Manish Kumar Jha Son of Chetnarayan Jha Authorized representative of Sri
                      Savitr solar Private Ltd., R/o 3rd Floor, A-4, Plot No. 17, Jawaharlal Nehru
                      Path, near Red Velvet Hotel, Bailey Road, P.S.- Rupaspur, Danapur, Patna-
                      801503.
                                                                             ... ... Opposite Party/s
                     ======================================================
                     Appearance :
                     For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate.
                                                      Mr. Vishal Vikram Rana, Advocate.
                                                      Ms. Misha Bharti, Advocate.
                                                      Mr. Utkarsh Vikram Rana, Advocate.
                                                      Mr. Kumar Shourabh, Advocate.
                                                      Mr. Akash Priye, Advocate.
                                                      Mr. Rishav Kumar Rao, Advocate.
                     For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP
                     ======================================================
                     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                           ORAL ORDER
    
    2   03-07-2026

    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

    APP for the State.

    SPONSORED

    2. The petitioner has prayed for bail registered for the

    offence punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 338,

    336(4), 340(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 which is

    correspondent to Sections 406, 420, 419, 467, 469, 471 and 34

    of the Indian Penal Code.

    3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

    petitioner who is alleged to be one of the directors of Shri Savitr
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41309 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
    2/3

    Solar Private Limited is said to have used the letterhead of one

    Shri Savitr Solar Private Limited and on that basis, attempted to

    obtain a tender.

    4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

    petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

    committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

    case. It is further submitted that it was merely an attempt and no

    tender was ever allotted to him, rather the tender itself was

    cancelled. It is further submitted that from perusal of the FIR

    itself, it would transpire that according to the case of the

    prosecution, there are altogether 7 directors in the company,

    namely ASCO Switchgears Private Limited. It is further

    submitted that the petitioner is a sleeping director and he does

    not have any active role. It is further submitted that similarly

    situated co-accused person namely, Savita Gupta has been

    granted bail by this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 34402 of 2026.

    Moreover, a statement has been made in para 3 of the petition

    that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing

    in judicial custody since 16.04.2026.

    5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

    for the State and submits that the petitioner has got criminal

    antecedent of four cases.

    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41309 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
    3/3

    6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

    considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

    inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with the conditions

    that the petitioner shall cooperate in the trial, shall remain

    physically present on each and every date fixed by the learned

    court below. The above named petitioner is directed to be

    enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten

    thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

    satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-II, Danapur in connection

    with Rupaspur P.S. Case No. 181 of 2026.

    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
    Sudhanshu/-

    U      T
     



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here