Back
SUBHASH VIDYARTHI
Dinesh Kumay Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Abhay Raj Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anant Pratap Singh, 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. 317 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 408 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Mahmoodabad, District Sitapur.
3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 21.07.2022 against eight persons, including the applicant, alleging that the informant and his family members had made investments in STS/Sankalp Group under allurement of lucrative return but upon maturity the money was not refunded to the investors.
4. In the affidavit filed in support of bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of wrong averments made in the FIR. The informant had not made any investment in STS/Sankalp Group rather he had made investment in LLC Multistate Agro Co-operative Society Ltd., under various schemes under which they had to be given plots of land upon completion of investments for various periods. The investors did not deposit
The court considered the applicant's criminal history, the arguments of the learned counsel, and the fact that five co-accused persons had already been granted bail in the same case before deciding t....
The court considered the principle of parity in granting bail to the applicant, taking into account the bail granted to other co-accused persons in similar circumstances.
Applicant shall not tamper with prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing witnesses, during investigation or trial.
The court may grant bail based on the assertion of innocence and lack of dispute from the opposing counsel, without affecting the merits of the case.
Granting bail based on lack of specific allegation, absence of criminal history, and parity with co-accused.
The court considered the similar bail granted to co-accused and the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, in granting bail to the applicant.
The court established that bail can be granted when the nature of allegations is not serious, and there is a lack of incriminating evidence, especially when co-accused have been granted bail under si....
The court granted bail based on the applicant's lack of prior criminal history and insufficient evidence against him, emphasizing the rights under Article 21.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
