Asif Nasim Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:23032

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3122 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Asif Nasim Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Desh Mitra Anand,Prateek Rawat,Utkarsh Anand

¶6

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Brijesh Singh Vishen,Rohit Tripathi

¶7

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶8

Heard Shri Desh Mitra Anand and Shri Utkarsh Anand, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Anshuman Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Kuldeep Srivastava, learned counsel for the Directorate of Enforcement and perused the records.

¶9

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.1501 of 2019 under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120-B I.P.C. registered at Police Station- Gomti Nagar, District- Lucknow.

¶10

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 08.12.2019 against nine persons, including the applicant, stating that the informant had invested money in Shine City Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Company, Lucknow for purchasing more than one plot of land. The Company had issued some cheques in the name of the informant but when the cheques were presented to the bank, the same were returned by the bank with a note "Fund Insufficient". The informant requested the Company for refund of the money through another mode but the Company avoided repayment of the money.

¶11

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is a Managing Director of the Company. The Company had completed several projects but due to certain misdeeds committed by some agents and other persons related to the Company, the Company could not complete the project in question. The Company had filed Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No.2230 of 2022 before this Court sitting at Allahabad seeking permission to perform the routine works of the Company and the writ petition was disposed of by means of

¶12

an order dated 01.07.2024 granting liberty to the applicant to file an application for his release on bail.

¶13

A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant disclosing his involvement in as many as 538 cases of similar nature.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant is languishing in jail since 01.11.2021 and even charges have not been framed till date.

¶15

The purpose of keeping an under trial person in custody is to ensure his/her availability to face the trial. When the applicant is languishing in jail since 01.11.2021 and in spite of expiry of a period of more than four and a half years since the applicant is in custody, the trial is not even commenced till date, the purpose is not being achieved. Numerous other co-accused persons have already been granted bail in the similar cases related to Shine City Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Company.

¶16

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, I am of the view that the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail in the aforesaid crime.

¶17

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶18

Let the applicant- Asif Nasim be released on bail in the aforementioned 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:-

¶19

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court.

¶20

[Subhash Vidyarthi, J.]

¶21

Order Date :- 23.4.2025

¶22

-Amit K-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Asif Nasim v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asif Nasim v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

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

Ambuj Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

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

Smt. Anarkali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Asif Nasim Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Asif Nasim Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Jag Jeevan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another