HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11171 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1.Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. 2.It is alleged in the prosecution case that the accused applicant was the Director of J.K.V. Company. The complainant has invested his money in the said company, however, even after maturity of the investment, the money has not been returned and on demanding, threat has been extended. It is further alleged that the co-accused persons along with the applicant are operating the company and are its owners. Now, the accused persons are blaming each other and are denying the demand to the genuine investors, who have been duped. 3.It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the applicant was the Director. 4.The co-accused Rajesh Kumar Singh who was also the Director of the company has been granted bail vide order dated 4.12.2019 passed by a coordinate Bench of this court. The applicant claims parity. Tffence is triable by Magistrate. The applicant has explained previous criminal history of 24 cases in para 17 of the bail application, . The applicant is in jail since 30.6.2025. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anand Singh, Anshuman Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ashish Kumar Srivastava .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 5.Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that the case of the applicant is akin to the case of the co-accused Rajesh Kumar Singh. 6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that the applicant has explained criminal history, the offence is triable by Magistrate, the co-accused Rajesh Kumar Singh, Director in the company, has been granted bail, the applicant was also Director in the company, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the period for which the applicant is in jail, the judgment of Supreme Court in Delhi Race Club (1940) Limited versus State of U.P. (2024)10 SCC 690, and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. 7.Let the applicant Ashish Kumar Srivastava, involved in Case Crime No. 216 of 2018 under sections 409, 420, 506 I.P.C., P.s. Godamba, district Lucknow be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) 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 and he shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial 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. Any other condition(s) which the trial court/court concerned may deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case, may also be imposed. BAIL No. 11171 of 2025 2 8.The application is allowed accordingly, on the ground of parity. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merit of the trial. November 17, 2025 kkb/ BAIL No. 11171 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench