Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:19331 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47313 of 2024 Applicant :- Mahesh Prasad Rajak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwini Kumar Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri A.K. Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.N. Srivastava, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 261 of 2024, under Sections 111, 61(2), 318, 336(3), 340(2), 351(3) BNS, Police Station- Talbehat, District- Lalitpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was not named in the FIR and as per FIR, the LUCC company after receiving money from the investor duped them and did not return their amount but during investigation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter on the ground that he was one of the agent in LUCC company. 4. He further submitted that merely being agent of company, applicant cannot be held liable, if subsequently company failed to repay the amount to its investors. 5. He further submitted that even arrest of Sri Manvendra Dwivedi, the Chairman of LUCC company, has been stayed by this Court vide order dated 18.11.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 15711 of 2024. 6. He further submitted that applicant is petty agent of the company and he was not having any concern with the working of the company. 7. He further submitted that applicant was not having any previous criminal history but subsequent to the present matter, he has also been made accused in as many as 10 other cases with similar allegations and criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the instant bail application. 8. He further submitted that, however, in the present matter applicant has also been challaned for the offense under Section 111 BNS i.e. for organized crime but there is no evidence of organized crime against the applicant and merely on the basis of subsequent criminal history and the fact that he is one of the agent of the company, it cannot be said that applicant involved in commission of offense of organized crime. 9. He further submitted that except the offense under Section 111 BNS i.e. for organized crime, all the other offenses are triable by Magistrate-I Class and in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 15.08.2024 i.e. for last more than five months. 10. 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. 11. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. From the record, it reflects that applicant was not named in the FIR and during investigation, he was made accused in the present matter on the ground that he was also one of the agent in LUCC company. From the record, it also reflects that being agent of the company, applicant deposited the money of the investors in the company but after that company failed to repay the amount to its investors and considering this fact, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that being agent of the company, applicant cannot be held liable, if subsequently company failed to repay the amount to its investors, cannot be completely ruled out. 13. Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of 10 other cases but it appears that applicant was not having any previous criminal history and subsequent to the present case, he has been made accused in all these cases on the basis of similar allegation. 15. Further, in the present matter, however, applicant has also been challaned for the offense under Section 111 BNS i.e. for organized crime but it appears that there is no cogent evidence against him on record with regard to offense under Section 111 BNS. 16. Further, except the offense under Section 111 BNS, all the other offenses are triable by Magistrate-I Class. 17. Further, in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 15.08.2024 i.e. for last more than five months. 18. Further, record also suggests that arrest of Sri Manvendra Dwivedi, the Chairman of LUCC company, has been stayed by Division Bench of this Court. 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- Mahesh Prasad Rajak 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:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (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. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activities. 23. 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. 24. 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. Order Date :- 10.2.2025 KK Patel Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad