Surendra Pal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:75196

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14618 of 2025

Applicant :- Surendra Pal Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Singh,Premnendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri P.K. Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Premnendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 688 of 2024, under Sections 111, 318, 336(3), 61(2), 340(2) BNS and 3/21 The Banning of Unregulated Deposit Scheme Act, Police Station Kotwali Lalitpur, District Lalitpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that as per allegation, applicant was one of the agents in LUCC company and he alongwith others duped the common public but entire allegation levelled against the applicant is totally false.

¶9

He further submitted that if company receives deposits from its investors through its agents and subsequently duped the amount of its investors then agents of the company cannot be held liable for the same.

¶10

He further submitted that however, in the present matter applicant has also been challaned for offence under section 111 BNS but there is no cogent evidence against him with regard to the offence of organized crime.

¶11

He further submitted that applicant was not having any previous criminal history but simultaneously alongwith present matter, he has been made accused in as many as fifteen other cases with similar allegations. He further submitted that criminal antecendents of the applicant has been explained in the instant bail application.

¶12

He further submitted that in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 23.8.2024 i.e. for last six months.

¶13

Per contra, learned AGA, however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument 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

However, as per allegation applicant was agent of LUCC company and subsequently after receiving deposits the maturity amount has not been returned to the investors but considering the fact that he is the agent of the company, submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant at this stage, cannot be ruled out.

¶16

Further, however, applicant has also been challaned for offence under section 111BNS i.e. Organized Crime but this Court finds merit in the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no cogent evidence against the applicant with regard to the offence of Organized Crime.

¶17

Further, apart from the present case, it reflects, applicant is having criminal history of 15 other cases but he was not having any previous criminal history and from perusal of his criminal antecedents, it reflects that alongwith the present matter, he has been made accused in all these cases with similar allegations.

¶18

Further, in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 23.8.2024 i.e. for last six months.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

Let the applicant- Surendra Pal Singh , 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:-

¶22

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

¶23

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement,

¶24

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 :- 8.5.2025 Ankita

¶29

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

Surendra Pal Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra Pal Singh 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