Allahabad High Court
BAIL/34870/2026 of RAVI KUMAR Vs STATE OF U.P. on 8 October 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34870 of 2026 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J. 1. Heard Sri Varinder Singh, learned counsel for the accused-applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present bail application has been moved by the accused-applicant
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34870 of 2026
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
2
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard Sri Varinder Singh, learned counsel for the accused-applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the accused-applicant Ravi Kumar to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 973 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) BNS, P.S.- Sikandrabad, District- Bulandshahar, during the pendency of trial.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the accused-applicant that the F.I.R. is lodged by Rahul Dubey, the official of Muthoot Microfin Private Limited on 10.10.2025 against four named persons including the accused- applicant with the allegation that the accused-applicant being Branch Manager of one of the Branch of Muthoot Microfin Private Limited Company has distributed loan to 17 persons with fake adhar and pan cards, in which Rs.19 lakhs has been siphoned off. The three co-accused, who are also the officials of the company, have been granted bail. The persons to whose account the amount of the loan was transferred, have not been made an accused. Further contended that the duty of the accused-applicant is to verify the adhar and pan cards and transmit the same to the head office and the entire loan disbursement and the subsequent verification of the documents have been carried out at the head office. There is nothing on record to show that the accused-applicant has been benefited by the same or the amount has been transmitted to the account of accused-applicant or the loanee are related to the applicant. The charge sheet is submitted. The applicant has no criminal history. The Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Varinder Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ravi Kumar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)
applicant is in jail since 29.06.2026 and hence, the applicant seeks to be released on bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. for State has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considered the role of accused-applicant and there is apparently no documentary evidence to show the involvement of the accused.
7. Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.
8. The accused/applicant 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 court concerned in view of observation made by the Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re [(2024)10SCC 685].
9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and speedy disposal. October 9, 2026 Shivangi BAIL No. 34870 of 2026 2 (Avnish Saxena,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVANGI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad