HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10218 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard Shri Santosh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.24 of 2025 under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 406, 420 of IPC registered at Police Station- Gurbuxganj, District- Raebareli. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 28.014.2025 against ten named persons, including the applicant, stating that the informant and several other persons had invested more than Rs.2 crore in Pashudhan Co-operative Society Ltd., Pashupati Mutual Benefit Nidhi Ltd. and P.L.M. India Ltd. but no money was returned to investors and the entire amount was invested by co-accused Om Prakash Gupta in purchasing properties. 4. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that co-accued Babulal Gupta has been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 5.8.2025 passed in Bail Application No.7238 of 2025. He seeks parity with the bail order of the said co-accused. 5. In para-27 of the affidavit, the applicant's involvement in four other Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Santosh Kumar Yadav, Dinesh Pratap Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ram Abhilakh Maurya .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) cases has been disclosed. 6. A list of shareholders of the Company issued by its Directors has been annexed as Annexure No.3 which shows that the applicant is not the Director of the company. 7. Although the learned AGA has opposed the bail application but instructions provided to him did not contain anything to the effect that the applicant is a Director of any of the aforesaid Companies. 8. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the grievance of the informant is regarding non-payment of investments made in a Company and it appears that the informant himself was fetching investment of the company; although the applicant is named in the FIR, the applicant is neither a Director nor any other principal position holder in the Company and the applicant seeks parity with the bail order of co-accused Babulal Gupta, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid case. 9. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed on the ground of parity. 10. Let the applicant- Ram Abhilakh Maurya be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to 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. November 10, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 10218 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench