Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Manish Pathak Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

Home
Allahabad HC
2022
Manish Pathak Vs State of U.P.Manish Pathak v. State of U.P.

Allowed

Manish Pathak v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Jan 2022BAIL/14744/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application allowed; applicant released on personal bond and two sureties pending trial for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, and 307 IPC.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on execution of personal bond and two sureties of like amount.

What the court decided

AI extract

A

Court No. - 74

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14744 of 2021

Applicant :- Manish Pathak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amaresh Yadava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 163 of 2018, under Sections- 147, 148, 149, 307 IPC, Police Station- Mehnagar, DistrictAzamgarh with a prayer to enlarge him on bail.

Learned counsel for the applicant while pressing the bail application submitted that the FIR was lodged against unknow persons. The name of the applicant surfaced in the statements of co-accused Ajay Yadav, Digvijay Singh @ Bholu Singh and Arpit @ Deepak, who were arrested by the police. He submitted that in fact the applicant is not involved in the crime. He has falsely been implicated. Further submission is that co-accused Ajay Yadav, Digvijay Singh @ Bholu Singh and Arpit @ Deepak, in whose statements the name of the applicant came into light, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 09.07.2019, 24.07.2019 and 13.09.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 27170 of 2019, 29616 of 2019 and 36064 of 2019, copies of bail orders filed before this Court are taken on record. The prayer is to allow the bail application.

Parties & counsel

AI extract

applicant
Manish Pathak
respondent
State of U.P.

Coram

AI extract

Saurabh Lavania

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Allahabad HC
Decided on: 5 Jan 2022 · January
Registered: 9 Mar 2021
Case no.: BAIL/14744/2021

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Saurabh Lavania

Billu Vs State of U.P.
4 Jan 2022
Ajay Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.
4 Jan 2022
Mohd. Khalid Vs State of U.P.
4 Jan 2022
Rajesh Vs State of U.P. and Another
5 Jan 2022
Banti @ Brajesh Vs State of U.P.

Cite this judgement

Manish Pathak v. State of U.P., BAIL/14744/2021 (ALL), decided on 5 January 2022.

The Allahabad High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Bench / Coram

Saurabh Lavania

Parties & counsel

Outcome

Applicant released on bail on execution of personal bond and two sureties of like amount.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

In a bail application under Sections 437, 438 Cr.P.C. for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, and 307 IPC, the High Court granted bail despite the applicant’s criminal history. The Court noted that co-accused had already been released on bail and held that the applicant was entitled to bail subject to standard conditions for behaviour, court attendance, and filing of orders.

A compact analysis

This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.

Learned AGA on the basis of the instructions received, opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the case including that co-accused have already been enlarged on bail by this Court. Learned AGA also submitted that the applicant is having criminal history of 13 cases to his credit and on this count, he also opposed the prayer for bail.

In response to the aforesaid, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the criminal history of the applicant has already been explained in para 12 of supplementary affidavit. In continuation, he submitted that in all the cases mentioned in para 12 of the supplementary affidavit except cases mentioned at serial Nos. (ii), (iii) and (xi), the applicant has already been

enlarged on bail. He submitted that in all these cases, the applicant has falsely been implicated. He also stated that as per the settled principle of law, on account of pendency of criminal cases, the bail application should not be rejected, though, it is required to be considered and taken note of.

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, as well as totality of facts and circumstances as also taking note of the fact that coaccused have already been enlarged on bail by this Court and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

Let applicant- Manish Pathak be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime Number on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

(1) Applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.

(2) Applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.

(3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

(4) The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked, before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

(5) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.

Order Date :- 5.1.2022/Arun/-

CNR

UPHC010501522021

Topic

Bail and Remand

Bench

Saurabh Lavania

Disposal

Allowed/Partly Allowed on merits

5 Jan 2022

Ravi Vs State of U.P. and Another

5 Jan 2022