Ram Naresh Sahu vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:40051

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9082 of 2025

Applicant :- Ram Naresh Sahu 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 Sandeep Kumar Mishra, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Ashwini Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 190 of 2024, under Sections 111, 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 352, 351(3) BNS and 3/21 Banning of Unregulated Deposit Scheme Act, Police Station Narahat, District Lalitpur, during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is not named in the FIR and as per FIR after receiving money from investor, LUCC company failed to return their money and during investigation applicant has been made accused in the present matter on the ground that he was one of the agents of the company.

¶9

He further submitted that if a company receives money from its investor through its agent and subsequently, misappropriated the money of its investor then agent of the company cannot be held liable.

¶10

He further submitted that however, applicant was not having any previous criminal history but when he was arrested in the present case then he has also been made accused in eleven other cases with similar allegations.

¶11

He further submitted that in the present matter applicant has also challaned for the offence under section 111 BNS but except the bald and verbal allegation, there is no cogent evidence on record which can connect him with the offence of organized crime.

¶12

He further submitted that in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 16.1.2025.

¶13

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶14

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶15

However, as per allegation LUCC company after receiving deposits from its investor did not return their money but it reflects during investigation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter on the ground that he was the agent of the company and considering the fact that applicant was the agent of company, argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant, cannot be ruled out, at this stage.

¶16

Further, however, in the present matter applicant has also been challaned for the offence under section 111 BNS but this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no cogent evidence against the applicant on record which can connect him with the offence of organized crime.

¶17

Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of eleven other cases but he was not having any previous criminal history and it appears that in all the cases, he has been made accused alongwith the present case with

¶18

similar allegations.

¶19

Further, in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 16.1.2025.

¶20

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶22

Let the applicant- Ram Naresh Sahu 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:-

¶23

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶24

(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.

¶25

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

¶26

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.

¶27

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail

¶28

application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶29

Order Date :- 19.3.2025 SKM

¶30

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ram Naresh Sahu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Naresh Sahu 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

Ranjeet vs State of U.P.

Ram Asare vs State of U.P.

Alok Kumar Jain Alias Alok Jain vs State of U.P.

Bhagat Singh vs State of U.P.

Shamshad Hussain vs State of U.P.

Jawanti Purty vs State of U.P.