Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89527 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16146 of 2025 Applicant :- Neeraj Jain Alias Bunty Jain Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlakar Dwivedi,Kunjesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Kunjesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S.B. Maurya, learned AGA-I for the State. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.270 of 2025, under Sections 111, 318(4), 336(3), 340(2), 352, 351(3), 61(2) BNS and Section 3/21 Banning of Unregulated Deposit Scheme Act, 2019, Police Station Kotwali Lalitpur, District Lalitpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, only being one of the agent of the LUCC company applicant has been made accused in the present matter. 4. He further submits that if through an agent of the company, any person deposited money in the company and subsequently company fails to return the money then agent of the company cannot be held responsible for that. 5. He further submits that however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of 11 other cases but he was made accused in all these cases alongwith present matter with similar allegations and criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the instant bail application. He next submits, applicant was not having any previous criminal history. 6. He further submits that however, applicant has also been challenged for the offence under Section 111 BNS i.e. for organized crime but there is no evidence in this regard against the applicant on record. 7. He further submits applicant is in jail in the present matter since 27.03.2025. 8. Per contra, learned AGA however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. Considering the fact that applicant was only agent of LUCC company, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant, cannot be completely ruled out at this stage. 11. Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of 11 other cases but in these cases he was made accused alongwith present matter with similar allegations and criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the instant bail application. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history. 12. Further, however, in the present matter, applicant has also been challaned for the offence under Section 111 BNS i.e. for organized crime but this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no cogent evidence against the applicant on record with regard to offence under Section 111 BNS. 13. Further, applicant is in jail in the present matter since 27.03.2025. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 16. Let the applicant- Neeraj Jain @ Bunty Jain 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 him 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. 17. 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. 18. 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 :- 26.5.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad