HEMANT KUMAR RAI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. CONFIDENTIAL SECTT. LKO AND ANOTHER
NABAIL/577/2025 · 2025-08-21
Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 143479 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 143479 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:49222 Court No. - 13
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 577 of 2025 Applicant :- Hemant Kumar Rai Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Confidential Sectt. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nadeem Murtaza,Komal Prasad Tiwari,Shashank Tilhari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pawan Kumar
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Shri Nadeem Murtaza, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Jayant Singh Tomar, the learned A.G.A.-I for the State, Dr. Pawan Kumar, the learned counsel for the complainant and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No.106 of 2025 under Sections 409/420/467/468/471/504/506 I.P.C. registered at Police Station- Gomti Nagar, District- Lucknow. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on18.03.2025 against eight persons, including the applicant, stating that the applicant has formed a Company like Shine City Infra Project Pvt. Ltd. in the name of S. Group of Companies Pvt. Ltd. This name was later on changed to Shreya Group of Companies which constituted of various companies like Shreya Infra Heights, Shreya Jeweller Traders, Shreya Associates, Shreya Enterprises, Shreya Bazar and M/S Shreya Infra Marketing Pvt. Ltd. The informant and some other persons had made investments in the Companies under allurement of lucrative returns but after some time, payment of returns stopped. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of the application, it has been stated that the applicant is involved in three other criminal cases. In one of the cases, the Investigating Officer has submitted a closure report. In one case, the applicant has filed an application for quashing of the FIR before the High Court of Andra Pradesh, which is pending and the third case relates to offence punishable with imprisonment up to seven years. 5. The learned A.G.A.-I has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and he has submitted that the investigation of the case is still going on. 6. Learned counsel for the complainant has also opposed the bail application and he has submitted that the applicant has duped a large number of persons and he is not entitled to be granted anticipatory bail. 7.
Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the FIR has been lodged when the informant did not get returns upon investments made in some Companies under allurement of lucrative returns; besides lodging of the FIR it has been stated that the applicant has not instituted any proceedings for recovery of his money from the Company, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. 8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of S.H.O./Court concerned on the following conditions and subject to any other conditions that may be fixed by the Trial Court : (i) that the applicant shall make himself/herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court. (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. . (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)
Order Date :- 21.8.2025/-Amit K- NABAIL No. 577 of 2025 2 Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench