Devendra Singh vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy./Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lko.

Held

The Court allowed the bail application of Devendra Singh. The Court considered the totality of facts and circumstances, including the nature of the accusation, evidence, severity of punishment, character of the accused, his role and involvement, involvement in other cases, and the apprehension of tampering with witnesses. Citing various Supreme Court judgments, including State of Rajasthan v. Balchand @ Baliay, Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors. v. Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh & Ors., Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee & Anr., and Mahipal v. Rajesh Kumar & Anr., the Court found it a fit case for granting bail, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. The applicant was directed to furnish a personal bond and two sureties, subject to several conditions designed to prevent misuse of liberty, tampering with evidence, or intimidation of witnesses. The trial court was also directed to conclude the trial expeditiously. Observations made were limited to the bail application and did not affect the trial court's independent decision.

Facts

This is a bail application filed by Devendra Singh under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The applicant seeks release from jail during the pendency of trial in Case Crime No. 119 of 2022, registered at Police Station Chowk, District Lucknow, under Sections 409, 406, 420, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR, lodged on May 11, 2022, alleges cheating consumers of a life insurance company regarding lapsed policies and incurred GST. The applicant claims innocence, stating he is not named in the FIR, has no connection to Axa Insurance Company, and is a consultant for EDECD Company. He also asserts he is not a beneficiary of the alleged amounts, no incriminating articles were recovered from him, and the recovery was made without complying with Section 100 Cr.P.C. Furthermore, he notes that co-accused have been granted bail and he has a favorable bail record in other cases.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, considering the allegations of cheating and criminal breach of trust related to life insurance policies and GST, and the applicant's role as a consultant for a separate company. Contentions: Petitioner (Applicant): The applicant is innocent and falsely implicated. He is not named in the FIR, has no affiliation with the insurance company, and is merely a consultant for EDECD Company. No incriminating articles were recovered from him, and the alleged recovery was conducted improperly. Other co-accused have been granted bail, and the applicant has a good record in other cases, with no likelihood of absconding or tampering with evidence. The trial is unlikely to conclude soon. Revenue (State): The learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the bail application, arguing that if released, the applicant might indulge in similar activities and misuse liberty. The State supported the order of the lower court.