Allowed

Hardev Patel v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Apr 2025BAIL/9804/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application filed by Hardev Patel, an accused in a case involving unregulated deposit scheme offences under the BNS. The court found no cogent evidence for organized crime charges and granted bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Hardev Patel released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions.

Hardev Patel vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:55279

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9804 of 2025

¶4

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 the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Sanjeev Patel, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA, for the State.

¶8

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.301 of 2024, under Sections 111, 318(4), 336(3), 340(2) and 351(3) BNS and Section 3/21 Banning of Unregulated Deposit Scheme Act, 2019, Police Station-Jakhaura, District- Lalitpur, during pendency of the trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not named in the FIR but during investigation, he has been made accused in the present matter on the ground he is the one of the agent of LUCC company. He further submits, if after receiving deposits from its investors, company did not return their amount then agent of the company cannot be held liable.

¶10

He further submits that however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of 12 other cases but criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the instant bail application and applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in all these cases applicant has been made accused along with present matter with similar allegations.

¶11

He further submits that, however, in the present matter applicant has also been challened for the offence under Section 111 BNS i.e. for organized crime but except the bald and verbal allegation, there is no cogent evidence of organized crime against him.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶15

From the record, it reflects, during investigation applicant has been made accused in the present matter and considering the fact that he is one of the agent of LUCC company, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant, cannot be ruled out at this stage.

¶16

Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of 12 other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application and he is not having any previous criminal history and in all these cases he has been made accused along with the present matter with similar allegations.

¶17

Further, however, applicant has also been challened for the offence under Section 111 BNS i.e. for organized crime but after considering the entire material available on record, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that prima-facie, it appears, there is no cogent evidence against him on record with regard to offence under Section 111 BNS i.e. organized crime.

¶18

Further, applicant is in jail in the present matter 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

16 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, 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.

¶24

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

¶25

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.

¶26

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.

¶27

Order Date :- 16.4.2025

¶28

SKM

¶29

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA 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?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Israt Ali vs State of U.P.

Kalua vs State of U.P.

Rahul vs State of U.P.

Omendra Alias Aaryendra Kumar vs State of U.P.

Shriram Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Jugendra Yadav vs State of U.P.