Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:37688 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8893 of 2025 Applicant :- Surendra Pal Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Singh,Prashant Agrawal,Premnendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Bharat Singh Pal, Advocate holding brief of Sri Premnendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manav Chaurasia, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No.687 of 2024, under Sections 111, 318, 336(3), 61(2) and 340(2) BNS Act and Section 3/21 Banning of Unregulated Deposited Scheme Act, Police Station Kotwali Lalitpur, District Lalitpur during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that FIR of the present case was lodged against six persons (non-applicant) and according to the FIR, LUCC Company received deposits from the common public through its agents but did not return their amount. 4. He further submits that during investigation applicant has been made accused in the present matter on the ground that he is the agent of the Company. 5. He further submits that if agent, after receiving money from common public, deposited the same in one of the Scheme of the Company and subsequently company failed to return their amount then agent cannot be held liable for the same. 6. He further submits that applicant was not having any previous criminal history but when he was arrested in the present matter then he was simultaneously made accused in twelve other cases with almost similar allegations and entire criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the instant bail application. 7. He further submits that however, applicant has also been challaned for offence under Section 111 BNS, i.e. for organized crime but as neither against the applicant nor any other co-accused persons, any charge sheet was earlier filed, therefore, offence under Section 111 BNS is not made out. He further submits that at this stage it cannot be said that applicant was the members of the alleged crime syndicate. 8. He further submits, along with applicant co-accused Mansingh and Ashok Ahirwar were also made accused during investigation with similar allegations but they have been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 17.02.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1060 of 2025 and case of applicant is at par with them. 9. He further submits, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 23.08.2024 i.e. for last more than six months. 10. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. As per allegation LUCC Company even after receiving deposits from its investors through its agents failed to return their money but it reflects that applicant was not named in the FIR and during investigation he has been made accused in the present matter on the ground that he was the agent of LUCC Company. Considering this fact, the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant that as applicant is agent of the Company, therefore, he cannot be held liable if subsequently Company failed to return the amount of its investors, cannot be completely brushed aside at this stage. 13. Further, however, applicant has also been challened for offence under Section 111 BNS but it reflects that there is no cogent evidence on record in this regard against the applicant and the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant in this regard cannot be ruled out at this stage. 14. Further, applicant was not having any previous criminal history but it appears, when he was arrested in the present matter then he was simultaneously made accused in twelve cases with similar allegations and entire criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the instant bail application. 15. Further, co-accused Mansingh and Ashok Ahirwar were also made accused along with the applicant during investigation with similar allegations and they have been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 17.02.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1060 of 2025 and case of applicant is at par with them and in the present matter applicant is in jail since 23.08.2024 i.e. for last more than six months. 16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 18. Let the applicant -Surendra Pal Singh 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 them 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 activity. 19. 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. 20. 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 :- 17.3.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad