Hardev Patel vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:53909

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9752 of 2025

Applicant :- Hardev Patel Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Munna Lal Patel,Sanjeev Patel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri. Sanjeev Patel, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri S.B. Maurya, learned AGA Ist for the State.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 1086 of 2024, under Sections 111, 318, 338, 336(3), 340(2), 352, 351(3), 61(2) B.N.S. and Section 3/21 Banning of Unregulated Deposit Scheme Act, 2019, Police Station Kotwali, District Lalitpur during pendency of the trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits, as per FIR applicant and others duped the common public as their company even after receiving deposits from them did not return their amount but admittedly applicant is the agent of the company, therefore, he cannot be held liable for the alleged misappropriation.

¶10

He further submits, however, in the present matter applicant has also challaned for offence under Section 111 B.N.S. but in this regard there is no cogent evidence against him on record.

¶11

He further submits, however, applicant was not having any previous criminal history but along with present matter he has been made accused in as many as 13 other cases with similar allegation and his criminal history has been explained in the affidavit filed in support of instant bail application and in the supplementary affidavit.

¶12

He further submits, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 07.11.2024 i.e. for last more than five months.

¶13

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument 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, applicant is named in the FIR and as as per allegation he along with others duped the common public but it reflects, he is agent of the company and considering this fact, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant with regard to false implication of the applicant, cannot be ruled out at this stage.

¶16

Further, however, applicant has also challaned for offence 111 B.N.S. but considering the entire material available on record, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no cogent evidence against the applicant with regard to organized crime.

¶17

Further, applicant is however, also having criminal history of thirteen cases but he was not having any previous criminal history and it appears, along with present matter he has been made accused in these cases with similar allegations and entire criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the instant bail application.

¶18

Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 07.11.2024 i.e. for last more than five months.

¶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

Let the applicant - Hardev Patel, 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,

¶24

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

¶28

Order Date :- 11.4.2025 Saurabh

¶29

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hardev Patel v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hardev Patel 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

Raju vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Kumar Gupta Alias Raju Barsainya vs State of U.P.

Harveer vs State of U.P.

Pankaj vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Kumar Jain vs State of U.P.

Sagar Urf Sahil Chaudhary vs State of U.P.