Sandeep Maitee Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sandeep Maitee Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release of applicant Sandeep Maitee on bail in Case Crime No. 327 of 2020 on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to conditions: (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.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, Sandeep Maitee, should be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 327 of 2020, Police Station Vibhuti Khand, District Lucknow, registered under Sections 34, 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 I.P.C.

Court's answer

Having considered the facts that the applicant had already been granted bail in 10 similar cases, had been in jail since 08.06.2020 with no prosecution witness examined, and that the learned A.G.A. could not dispute these facts, the Court found the facts sufficient to make out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail.

Ratio / Principle

The bail application was allowed and the applicant was ordered to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions that he shall not tamper with prosecution evidence, shall not pressurize prosecution witnesses, and shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 13 (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.), allowed Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8398 of 2024 filed by Sandeep Maitee seeking bail in Case Crime No. 327 of 2020, Police Station Vibhuti Khand, District Lucknow, under Sections 34, 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 I.P.C. The F.I.R. alleged that the informant's investments in M/s Vishwas Trading Company, in which the applicant was an employee, yielded no returns. The supporting affidavit disclosed the applicant's involvement in 31 other similar cases; he had already been granted bail in 10 such cases, was in custody since 08.06.2020, and not even a single prosecution witness had been examined. The learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application but could not dispute these facts. Bail was granted on a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount, conditioned on non-tampering with prosecution evidence, non-pressurization of prosecution witnesses, and appearance on every trial date. Decided September 8, 2025.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8398 of 2024

Sandeep Maitee

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Krishna Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 13

HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.

Heard Shri Krishna Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Mayank Sinha, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.327 of 2020, under Sections 34, 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Vibhuti Khand, District Lucknow.

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged against several accused persons, including the applicant, stating that the informant has made investments in M/s Vishwas Trading Company in which the applicant was an employee and no return was paid on the investments.

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant's involvement in 31 other cases of similar nature has been disclosed in para 16 of the affidavit.

The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has already been granted bail in 10 other cases of similar nature and the applicant is languishing in jail since 08.06.2020 and as per his information, not even a single prosecution witness has been examined till date.

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but he could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for

BAIL No. 8398 of 2024

2

enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

Let the applicant - Sandeep Maitee - 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:-

(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.

September 8, 2025 S. Shivhare

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench