Ashok Kumar Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court)
Summary: The Allahabad High Court allowed Ashok Kumar’s bail application in Case Crime No. 303 of 2025, registered at Police Station Navabad, District Jhansi, under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 61(2)(A) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The proceedings arose from an FIR dated 10 August 2025 lodged by a GST official against Durgesh Kumar, proprietor of M/S D.K. Enterprises, concerning alleged GST fraud of ₹5,53,96,484. The applicant’s alleged involvement emerged during investigation as a supplier of SIM cards and fake e-way bills for registering fake firms. The supplied order records recovery of 16 SIM cards, an e-way bill and two mobile phones following his arrest.
The applicant’s counsel argued that he had been falsely implicated and was merely a paid delivery worker employed by a person named Rajat. Relying on the supplementary affidavit and the applicant’s statement described in the order as recorded under Section 161 Cr PC, counsel submitted that the applicant received ₹20,000 per month for delivering sealed envelopes to specified persons after losing his previous job. Counsel further submitted that no amount had been credited to the applicant’s account, that the charge sheet had been submitted, and that the applicant had no criminal history. He had remained in custody since 12 April 2026. The State opposed bail but, as recorded by the Court, could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
After considering the rival submissions and examining the record, the Court specifically took into account the applicant’s stated role as a delivery boy who delivered sealed envelopes for Rajat and the absence of credits in his account. Without touching the merits of the case, it allowed the bail application and directed release upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. While issuing this direction, the Court referred to Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In re. The applicant was also directed to cooperate in the judicial process for fair and speedy disposal.
Cases Discussed
- Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh — (2024) 10 SCC 674 (Supreme Court). Cited by the High Court while directing release on a personal bond and two sureties.
- Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In re — (2024) 10 SCC 685 (Supreme Court). Cited by the High Court in connection with the direction concerning the personal bond and sureties.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
1. Sri Shubham Yadav, learned counsel for the accused-applicant hands up the supplementary affidavit disclosing the additional points in support of the bail application. The same is taken on record.
1A. Heard Sri Yadav, learned counsel for the accused-applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the accused-applicant Ashok Kumar to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 303 of 2025, under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2)(A) BNS, P.S.- Navabad, District- Jhansi, during the pendency of trial.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the accused-applicant that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated during investigation in F.I.R. dated 10.08.2025 lodged by the GST official against Sri Durgesh Kumar, the owner of the firm named M/S D.K. Enterprises. There is the allegation of GST fraud to the tune of Rs.5,53,96,484/-, wherein the role of accused-applicant was discovered, as he is the supplier of sim cards and fake e-way bills for the purpose of registering of fake firms. During the investigation, the accused-applicant was arrested and there was recovery of 16 sim cards, e-way bill and two mobile phones. Further contended that the accused-applicant works as a delivery boy with Rajat. He has made a specific mention in para 4 and 5 of the supplementary affidavit that he is a paid worker of Rajat, who paid him Rs.20,000/- per month for the delivery of sealed envelopes. He being in search of the job, was in employment under Rajat. Learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court towards his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr PC, wherein it is made specific assertion before the Investigating Officer that he has been working under Rajat, when he lost his job. He has also shown his nature of duty. Further contended that no amount has ever been credited to the account of accused-applicant. He has no complicity in this case. The charge sheet is submitted. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 12.04.2026 and hence, the applicant seeks to be released on bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. for State has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considered the role of accused-applicant and specific statement of the accused that he works for Rajat and being a delivery boy, he merely delivers the sealed envelops to the indicated persons. There is no credit in the account of the accused-applicant.
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.
