Amit Kumar Singh @ Amit Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that a call centre was operating in Azad Vihar Colony, which is said to have defrauded and deceived several innocent individuals on the pretext of providing online employment opportunities.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. The offences alleged are triable by a Magistrate. It is stated that the SBI passbook allegedly recovered from the applicant actually belongs to him. No amount has been credited to the applicant’s bank account from any of the victims. The applicant is not even aware of the identity of the director or owner of the said company. He is languishing in jail since 17.06.2025 and has no criminal antecedents.

¶14

It is further submitted that there is no likelihood of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses. In case the applicant is released on bail, he undertakes not to misuse the liberty of bail.

¶15

Learned AGA, on the other hand, has opposed the bail application, contending that the applicant was running the said call centre and had defrauded several citizens.

¶16

Upon due consideration of the Investigating Officer’s failure to ascertain the

¶17

BAIL No. 6989 of 2025

¶18

2

¶19

ownership of the alleged call centre, the fact that the applicant has no criminal history, the offences being triable by a Magistrate, and the applicant’s continued detention since 17.06.2025, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail to the applicant.

¶20

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶21

Let the applicant Amit Kumar Singh @ Amit Singh involved in Case Crime No. 228 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2000, Police Station – Banthra, District – Lucknow, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bonds 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:-

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

(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.

¶25

(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 and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶26

(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, in accordance with law.

¶27

(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 Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fail to appear before the court on the

¶28

BAIL No. 6989 of 2025

¶29

3

¶30

date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 of BNS).

¶31

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial.

¶32

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶33

October 29, 2025 R.C.

¶34

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Amit Kumar Singh @ Amit Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar Singh @ Amit Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Vijay Singh Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Munna @ Shoaib @ Mohammad Shoaib Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Ram Janki Mishra and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Hari Ram Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Ashok Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Farki Roka Magar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.