Keshav Goyal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9711 of 2024

Keshav Goyal

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

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

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Farooq Ayoob, Azay Kumar Mishra, Kaustubh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Court No. - 23

¶8

HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶10

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.88 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B I.P.C. and Section 66D of the I.T. (Amendment) Act, P.S. Cyber Crime, District Lucknow.

¶11

In the prosecution case it is alleged that applicant along with the co-accused persons by making whats-app call upon the mobile number of the complainant threatened him by showing themselves to be a CBI officer and compelled him to withdraw the amount from his account and send it to the account of Keshav Goel from which account money was withdrawn and has been distributed amongst co-accused persons.

¶12

Learned counsel for applicant submits that F.I.R. has been lodged after delay of two days, there is no direct evidence in this case against the applicant. Applicant is not named in the F.I.R. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. There is no material to link the applicant for offence in question except the confessional statement of the co-accused in police custody. Applicant is innocent and is in jail since 28.06.2024. It is also submitted that the co-accused Yashpal Diwakar has already been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 9.9.2024 passed in

¶13

BAIL No. 9711 of 2024

¶14

2

¶15

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.9568 of 2024.

¶16

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer.

¶17

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 28.06.2024; criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 26 of the bail application; the alleged offences are triable by magistrate, there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery; the co-accused Yashpal Diwakar has already been granted bail and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court finds it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶18

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶19

Let the applicant- Keshav Goyal be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

(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.

¶23

(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.

¶24

(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 under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶25

BAIL No. 9711 of 2024

¶26

3

¶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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶28

(Rajeev Bharti,J.)

¶29

February 27, 2026

¶30

Shravan

¶31

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Keshav Goyal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Keshav Goyal 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Brijesh Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Tusar Mahapatra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mo. Talim Alias Raja vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Sunil Kumar Chhabra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P. and Another

Mahesh Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Sectt. Lko.

Sukhraj vs Union of India Thru. N.C.B. Zonal Unit Lko.