Allowed

Shyamvir Solanki v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Apr 2025BAIL/10901/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application filed for enlargement on bail during trial, this Court found that no convincing material indicated tampering with evidence. The Court allowed the application, releasing the applicant on bail subject to standard conditions and specific clauses to ensure expedition and prevent misuse.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding attendance, trial participation, and non-tampering with evidence.

Shyamvir Solanki vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:47640

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10901 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Shyamvir Solanki Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dur Vijay Singh,Kamal Kaushal Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Dur Vijay Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the applicant Shyamvir Solanki, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 429 of 2024, under Sections 85, 80(2) BNS and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at P.S. Sasni, District Hathras.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued as follows:

¶10

(i) The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case.

¶11

(ii) The applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased Neelam Tomar.

¶12

(iii) The marriage of the deceased Neelam Tomar was solemnized with Monu Solanki son of the applicant on 24.11.2023.

¶13

(iv) General and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant.

¶14

(v) Postmortem examination report shows that the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging.

¶15

(vi) Monu Solanki the husband of the deceased is in jail.

¶16

(vii) The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 22 of the affidavit and is in jail since 01.02.2025.

¶17

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

¶18

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. The cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. Monu Solanki the husband of the deceased is in jail.

¶19

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶20

Let the applicant Shyamvir Solanki , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶21

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶22

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶23

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she/he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶24

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her/him presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her/him, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS, 2023.

¶25

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS, 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is

¶26

deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her/him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against her/him under Section 269 BNS, 2023.

¶27

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶28

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶29

The bail application is allowed .

¶30

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶31

Order Date :- 4.4.2025 M. ARIF

¶32

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶33

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shyamvir Solanki v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyamvir Solanki v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sahil @ Nirhu vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Verma and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Vishwajeet vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Aanchal Puri Alias Kangana Shidhu and Another vs State of Up and Another

Vipin Kumar Mishra and Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Kumar vs State of U.P.