Kamal Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

LUCKNOW

¶3

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2178 of 2025

Kamal Singh

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

¶8

.....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prashant Vikram Singh, Ayodhya Prasad Mishra A.P. Mishra, Rituraj Mishra, Vinod Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Veer Bahadur Lal Srivasta

¶9

Court No. - 12

¶10

HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J.

¶11

Short counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the informant is taken on record.

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Veer Bahadur Lal Srivastav as well as learned AGA for the State.

¶13

The accused-applicant seeks bail in FIR/Case Crime No.255 of 2024 under Sections 316(5), 318(2), 61(2) BNS, P.S.- Chowk, DistrictLucknow West.

¶14

In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the applicant, an employee in the Manipuram Jewellers Ltd. was involved in forgery and had caused financial loss to the company. Allegations were also leveled that the applicant had siphoned off the ornaments etc. weighing approximately 18531.86. grams. It is stated that he had used the said goods of the company for his own benefits for purchasing shares, etc.

¶15

In the light of the said, learned counsel for the applicant argues that the case of the applicant is triable by Magistrate and as per the statement of the company itself recorded under Section 180 BNSS, it was stated that the applicant had run away along with 10 jewelers. Names of the jewelers were also given in the list of persons who were allegedly involved with

¶16

BAIL No. 2178 of 2025

¶17

2

¶18

the applicant. It is also recorded that a few of the said jewelers who were allegedly involved with the applicant had made certain payments through the company which are reflected in the statement annexed with the counter affidavit.

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicant states that in fact, the applicant has given an affidavit that he would make effort for recovery of the money drawn from the said jewelers, once he is released on bail. He further states that the applicant has no criminal history and only one witness has been examined so far.

¶20

Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant has opposed the bail application argues that the applicant had confessed to have done the offence as is evident from Annexure No.6 to the bail application wherein he had admitted that10kg of gold was stolen from his possession.

¶21

Learned counsel for the applicant states that the said letter has no evidentiary value forthwith and in any case, it does not establish that the applicant has siphoned off the ornaments etc.

¶22

Considering the nature of the allegations and the fact that the offences are triable by the Magistrate coupled with the fact that the applicant is in custody since 30.12.2024 and has no previous criminal antecedent, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

¶23

Let the applicant- Kamal Singh be released on bail in aforesaid FIR/Case Crime Number subject to her furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) each of the like amount with the following conditions:

¶24

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶25

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶26

(c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police

¶27

BAIL No. 2178 of 2025

¶28

3

¶29

officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶30

(Pankaj Bhatia,J.)

¶31

November 24, 2025

¶32

V. Sinha