Devendra Pal Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Lko

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6910 of 2024

¶3

Devendra Pal Singh

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.	Lko		.....	Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) :	Kaustubh Ashutosh Dwivedi, Niwas Srivastav, Shiv Pal Pandey, S	Singh, Srivastav Prabhat Pathak, Sanjay Singh, umit Cha	Ambrish a, Mano Dwivedi, Ravi Kumar Sudhir uhan	Kumar, j Kumar Rama Prakash Sharma, Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s):	G.A., Man	oj Kumar	Singh

¶6

Court No. - 15

¶7

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶9

It is alleged in the prosecution case that the co-accused Uma Shankar Mishra had introduced the complainant to Ajay Pal, Vijay Pal and the present applicant by telling him that they are rice exporters. It is alleged that the complainant had supplied food grains worth Rs. 5,14,038/- to the applicant, but the applicant has not paid a single penny to him.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has explained criminal history of 3 cases against the applicant in paragraph nos. 27, 28 and 29 of the bail application. He further submits that the co-accused Uma Shankar Mishra, who was the master mind, has been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this court vide order dated 18.08.2025 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 479 of 2025. He seeks parity with the bail order of the said co-accused.

¶11

It is further submitted the offences are triable by the Magistrate. Chargesheet in the case has been filed. It is lastly submitted that it is

¶12

BAIL No. 6910 of 2024

¶13

2

¶14

a pure business transaction. The complainant has filed a suit for recovery of money. He further submits that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail, but they could not dispute that it is a case of parity.

¶16

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the period for which the applicant is in jail since 20.03.2024, the fact that chargesheet has been filed; the fact that the criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph no. 27, 28 and 29 of the bail application; the applicant seeks parity with the bail orders of coaccused Uma Shankar Mishra and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶17

Let the applicant Devendra Pal Singh , involved in Case Crime No. 0568 of 2023, under sections 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 120-B I.P.C, P.S. Risiya, District Bahraich, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶18

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶19

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶20

(iii) 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 officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail

¶22

BAIL No. 6910 of 2024

¶23

3

¶24

and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶25

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A I.P.C. (now 269 BNS)

¶26

(vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A I.P.C. (now 209 BNS).

¶27

The application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶28

November 7, 2025 DiVYa

¶29

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶30

Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Devendra Pal Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devendra Pal Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Lko

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

Hukumdutt Yadav @ Pawan Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Nand Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Naved Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Johid Akhtar vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Santosh Singh and Another vs State of U.P. Addl. Chief Secy./ Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Anupama Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Bal Vikas Evam Pushtahar Lko. and 9 Others