Allowed

Dinesh Kumar Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Allahabad HC20 Feb 2024BAIL/1908/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Sections 420, 409, 34 IPC arising from an FIR over unpaid returns on investments in a private company. The applicant, a director like co-accused already granted bail and in jail since September 2022, was enlarged on bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of no evidence tampering, no witness pressure, and trial attendance.

Dinesh Kumar Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav vs State of U.P… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:50162

¶2

Court No. - 31

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1908 of 2024 Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhay Raj Singh,Eshan Garg,Somdutta Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Eshan Garg, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Abhishek Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 604 of 2022, under Section 420, 409, 34 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Barabanki.

¶7

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 23.06.2022, against nine persons, including the applicant, stating that the informant had made some investments in Sangharsh Total Solutions Pvt. Ltd. but after maturity, no return was paid to him.

¶8

The applicant's involvement in 34 other cases has been disclosed in para 16 of the affidavit, in 22 of which the applicant has already been granted bail.

¶9

The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that coaccused persons-Atul Kumar Verma and Om Prakash Verma, have already been granted bail in the present case by means of orders dated 05.09.2023 and 05.09.2023, passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 10872 of 2023 and 10862 of 2023, and copies of their bail orders have been annexed to the bail application whereas the applicant is languishing in jail since

¶10

28.09.2022.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been implicated because he was a Director of the company and both the co-accused persons who have been granted bail, were also Directors of the Company; therefore, the case set up against the applicant is similar to that set up against the co-accused persons, who have been granted bail.

¶12

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶13

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

¶14

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant-Dinesh Kumar Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav 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 magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶16

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶17

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶18

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court.

¶19

[Subhash Vidyarthi,J.]

¶20

Order Date :- 24.7.2024/Ruhi H.

¶21

Digitally signed by :- RUHI HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dinesh Kumar Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Kumar Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shiv Ruchi Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Rajbir Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. Lko. and Another

Anurag Mahajan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Sey. Home Lko. and Another

Bhagwan Laxmi Narain Mandir Trust Situate at Mohalla- Vs State of U.P.and ORS.6

Juvenile v Accused of Crime No 125/2022, Thru. His Natural Guardian Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Mohammad Naim Khan Vs the State of U.P and Anr.