Jitendra Singh Niranjan vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:77516

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11997 of 2025

Applicant :- Jitendra Singh Niranjan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwini Kumar Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ashwini Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S. B. Singh, learned AGA-I for the State.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 1086 of 2024, under Sections 111, 318, 338, 336(3), 61(2), 340(2), 352, 351(3) B.N.S. and 3/21 Banning of Unregulated Deposit Scheme Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Lalitpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is not named in the FIR and as per FIR after receiving money from investors, LUCC company failed to return their money and during investigation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter on the ground that he was one of the agent of the company.

¶9

He further submitted that if company receives money from its investor through its agent and subsequently, misappropriates the money of its investors, then agent of the company cannot be held liable.

¶10

He further submitted that however, applicant was not having any previous criminal history but when he was arrested in the present matter then he has also been made accused in nine other cases with similar allegations.

¶11

He further submitted that in the present matter applicant has also challaned for the offence under section 111 BNS but except the bald and verbal allegation, there is no cogent evidence on record which can connect him with the offence of organized crime.

¶12

He further submitted that in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 01.02.2025.

¶13

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶14

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶15

As per allegation LUCC company after receiving money from its investors

¶16

did not return their money and it reflects, during investigation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter on the ground that he is the agent of the company and considering the fact that applicant is the agent of company, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant, cannot be ruled out, at this stage.

¶17

Further, however, in the present matter applicant has also been challaned for the offence under section 111 BNS but this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no cogent evidence against the applicant on record which can connect him with the offence of organized crime.

¶18

Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of nine other cases but he was not having any previous criminal history and it appears that in all the cases, he has been made accused alongwith the present case with similar allegations.

¶19

Further, in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 01.02.2025.

¶20

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶22

Let the applicant - Jitendra Singh Niranjan , 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 the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶23

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶24

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶25

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶26

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶27

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶28

Order Date :- 12.5.2025

¶29

Ankita

¶30

Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jitendra Singh Niranjan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Singh Niranjan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jagdeesh vs State of U.P.

Ramakant Yadav Alias Mintu vs State of U.P.

Durgesh Nishad vs State of U.P. and Another

Surendra Singh Tomar vs State of U.P.

Ram Sabad and 2 Others vs State of U.P.

Hardev Patel vs State of U.P.