Allowed

Hemant Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Allahabad HC25 Jan 2024BAIL/902/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to Hemant Singh, an accused in a cheating and criminal bribery case. The court observed that prima facie he was an employee rather than a managing director, allowing him to make a bail case subject to specific bonds.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions regarding evidence tampering and trial conduct.

Hemant Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:7719

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 902 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Hemant Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including upto date case diary of the case and the investigation of this case is going on.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Hemant Singh for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 357/ 2023, under Sections 409, 420 and 506 of I.P.C., Police Station- Aliganj, District- Lucknow, during trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that it is a case of false implication. The applicant was an employee of GID Housing & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. and was not concerned with the management of the same company and his job was only to keep the accounts intact, however, he has neither approached any depositor nor has lured any person to deposit money in the aforesaid company.

¶10

While drawing the attention of this Court towards the certificate of incorporation of the aforesaid company, it is submitted that the Directors of the aforesaid company were Shivendra Singh Chauhan and Dipika Singh and even if the case of the prosecution is taken on its face, a stray reference has been made of him in the F.I.R. without there being any specific allegation. Criminal history of three cases has been shown against the applicant, out of which in one case, he has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 04.01.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.- 15360 of 2023. The applicant is in jail in this case since 21.11.2023 and he undertakes that he will cooperate in the investigation as well as in the trial, in case any adverse Police Report under Section 173

¶11

(2) Cr.P.C. is filed. There is no apprehension that after being released on bail the applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶12

Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, opposes the prayer of bail of the applicant.

¶13

Perusal of the record, in the background of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, would reveal that the documents, pertaining to the incorporation of the aforesaid company, placed on record, would reveal that applicant was not associated with the management of the aforesaid company and prima facie, it appears that he was an employee. Various accused persons have been arrayed in the F.I.R., however, out of these accused persons, there were few, who were managing the aforesaid company at the relevant point of time. The money is stated to have been deposited in the aforesaid company and the certificate of incorporation of the company, brought on record, would reveal that Shivendra singh Chauhan and Dipika Singh were the Directors of the aforesaid company at the relevant point of time. The applicant is in jail in this case since 21.11.2023. Criminal history of three cases of the applicant has been explained in para No. 22 of the bail application. The presence of the applicant could be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions.

¶14

Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is thus allowed .

¶15

Let the accused/applicant- Hemant Singh involved in abovementioned case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶20

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶21

Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the case.

¶22

Order Date :- 25.1.2024 Gurpreet Singh

¶23

Digitally signed by :- GURPREET SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Hemant Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hemant Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Amit Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Jitendra Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Rauwab Ali @ Daddan Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.

Vikas Yadav Vs State of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Shivendra Singh Chauhan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, District-Lucknow

Vishnu Pratap Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others