HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8942 of 2026 Court No. - 68 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. Heard Shri P. C. Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey and Shri Anand Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri S. K. Rai, learned AGA-I for the State-respondents and perused the records. The instant bail application seeks enlargement of applicant Vinay Shankar Lal on bail in Case Crime No. 294 of 2015, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Pipari, District Sonbhadra, during the pendency of the trial before the Court below. The bail application of the applicant before the Court below was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Sonebhadra vide order dated 26.2.2026 and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 17.2.2026. Shri P. C. Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel while pressing the bail plea of the applicant vehemently submits that the applicant is entirely innocent and has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number for ulterior motives. The FIR giving rise to the case crime number in question was lodged nominating one Rajesh Kumar Rai with the allegation that the nominated person is the Director of a Chit Fund Company, namely, Vaibhav Pariwar India Project Ltd., which has been opened in the house of Rakesh Maurya. The informant is stated to have invested Rs.16,02,000/- in his name, Rs.7,00,000/- in his daughter Charu Mishra's name, Rs.6,50,000/- in the name of Mehta Mishra and Rs.1,00,000/- in the name of his wife Smt. Manju Mishra in a scheme which was to mature Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Kumar Raghuvanshi, Sunil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vinay Shankar Lal .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) in one year. The FIR alleges that when the maturity period came, the informant could not withdraw his money as the company had closed down. The Managing Director was located and then prosecution was launched. It is argued that the applicant is not named in the FIR and his name has surfaced in the statement of one Abdul Ansari son of Anul Ansari, Manager of the Chit Fund Company. It is argued that the applicant was appointed as Director of the Chit Fund Company Vaibhav Pariwar India Project Ltd., having registered office in South Dhaka Asansol, West Bengal, India between 18.6.2013 and 18.9.2014. It is also argued that the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India had carried out an inspection of the company under Section 206 (5) of the Companies Act and submitted its report dated 24.8.2018 which has been brought on record as Annexure-7 to the bail application. Learned counsel for the applicant has invited the attention of the Court to the findings recorded by the Inspecting Officer which throws light on the complicity of the applicant in the alleged crime. The findings are being quoted hereunder:- "The company and its directors have thus collected deposits from the public without following procedure laid down in the Deposit Rules which is in excess to the limits laid down by Section 58A of the Companies Act, 1956 and paid commission much in excess of the permissible limit. Many of these investors were small depositors. The company and Shri Rakesh Kumar Rai, Mg. Director and other directors namely Smt. Indrakala Rai and Shri Manoj Kuma Rai have thus violated the provisions of Section 58A and 58AA of the Companies Act, 1956 and are liable to be prosecuted for the same. Shri Binay Kumar Lall, director of the company was posted at the registered office of the company in West Bengal just to receive papers (dak) and forward the same to the Head Office at Varanasi. Though he has signed the balance sheet foe 2012-13 but it was done under duress and he has not received any remuneration as per the bank statement. Therefore, it is apparent that he was not involved in the management of the company and the offences committed by it." Shri P. C. Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has next argued that the offence of Section 406 and 420 IPC cannot run together as BAIL No. 8942 of 2026 2 has been held by the Apex Court in the case of Delhi Race Club Ltd., versus State of U.P. reported in 2024 (10) SCC 690. It is further argued that the applicant has neither committed any forgery or criminal breach of trust or for that matter any offence under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 504, 506 IPC and his implication in this case crime number is unwarranted. He is entitled to be enlarged on bail forthwith. It is further argued that the nominated accused Rajesh Kumar Rai has already been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.5.2018. The applicant undertakes to cooperate the trial and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if released on bail. Hence, bail is prayed for. Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. Considering all above facts and circumstances, inspection carried out by Ministry of Cooperate Affairs, law laid by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Deli Race Club Ltd., (supra) the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the accused-applicant, Vinay Shankar Lal, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence. 2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity. 3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial. 4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below BAIL No. 8942 of 2026 3 will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. March 31, 2026 Ravi Prakash BAIL No. 8942 of 2026 4 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad