Mahesh Prasad Rajak vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:46135

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6204 of 2025

Applicant :- Mahesh Prasad Rajak 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 A. K. Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.231 of 2024, under Sections 111, 318, 61(2) BNS, 2023 and Sections 3/21 B.U.D.S. Act, Police Station- Jakhlaun, District- Lalitpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not named in the FIR but during investigation, he has been made accused in the present matter on the ground he is the one of the agent of LUCC company. He further submits, if after receiving deposits from its investors, company did not return their amount then agent of the company cannot be held liable.

¶9

He further submits that however, applicant was not having any previous criminal history but subsequent to the present matter, he has also been made accused in as many as 12 other cases with similar allegations and criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the instant bail application.

¶10

He further submits that, however, in the present matter applicant has also been challened for the offence under Section 111 BNS i.e. for organized crime but except the bald and verbal allegation, there is no cogent evidence of organized crime against him.

¶11

He further submits that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 25.11.2024.

¶12

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

¶13

counsel for the applicant.

¶14

I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶15

From the record, it reflects, during investigation applicant has been made accused in the present matter but considering the fact that he is one of the agent of LUCC company, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant, cannot be ruled out at this stage.

¶16

Further, however, applicant was not having any previous criminal history but subsequent to the present matter, he has also been made accused in as many as 12 other cases with similar allegations and criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the instant bail application.

¶17

Further, however, applicant has also been challened for the offence under Section 111 BNS i.e. for organized crime but after considering the entire material available on record, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that prima-facie, it appears, there is no cogent evidence against him on record with regard to offence under Section 111 BNS i.e. organized crime.

¶18

Further, applicant is in jail in the present matter since 25.11.2024.

¶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

15 Let the applicant- Mahesh Prasad Rajak 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, 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.

¶24

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

¶25

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.

¶26

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.

¶27

Order Date :- 2.4.2025 Zafar

¶28

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mahesh Prasad Rajak v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh Prasad Rajak 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

Vishal Kumar vs State of U.P. Though It Principal Secretary (Home)Lucknow

Parvez Alias Ishtiyaq Ali vs State of U.P.

Rahul vs State of U.P.

Sonu vs State of U.P. and Another

Makardhwaj Bhoi vs State of Up

Rajesh vs State of U.P.