NEELAM KAUSHAL v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO
BAIL/7698/2024 · 2025-02-07
Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 148126 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 148126 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8247 Court No. - 29 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7698 of 2024 Applicant :- Neelam Kaushal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kishor Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri Ajay Kishor Pandey, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh, the learned AGA for the State. 2. The present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking bail in Case Crime No.655 of 2020, under Sections - 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station- Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR. Applicant is neither Director nor Agent or worker of the company and neither she is beneficiary. It is further submitted that the name of the present applicant is wrongly implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that cheating has been caused by the Director of the Company. It is also submitted that in case the applicant is enlarged on bail she shall not tamper with the evidence or misuse the liberty of bail and will also cooperate in the trial proceedings. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that co- accused persons, namely, Dharmendra Kaushal, Ajeet Kumar Gupta, Basudev Goswami and Ashish Tiwari have been granted bail by means of the orders dated 30.06.2023, 16.12.2023, 06.09.2023 and 04.09.2023 passed by this Court in Criminal
Misc. Bail Applications No. 8074 of 2023, 14246 of 2023, 11082 of 2023 and 8068 of 2023. 5. On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not controvert the aforesaid factual matrix. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the fact that applicant is neither Director nor Agent or worker of the company and neither she is beneficiary and cheating has been caused by the Director of the Company and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it would be appropriate to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail. 7. The bail application is allowed. 8.
Let applicant- Neelam Kaushal be released on bail in the above case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. Order Date :- 7.2.2025 Pradeep/- Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench