Rahul Kumar Patel vs State of U.P.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11157 of 2025

Rahul Kumar Patel

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Ajeet Kumar Madhesia
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 51

¶6

HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶8

The present third bail application has been filed by the applicant in S.T. No.816 of 2021 (State Vs. Rahul Kumar Patel), arising out of Case Crime No. 242 of 2021, under Sections 364, 302, 201, 34 IPC, Police Station Bhelupur, District-Varanasi with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶9

It has been argued by learned counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The informant has lodged first information report on 11.5.2021 alleging that her son was taken away by the applicant from her house and thereafter he has gone missing. Later on dead body of the deceased was recovered from river. Learned counsel submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated merely on the basis of suspicion. There is no eye witness of the alleged incident. Regarding alleged CCTV footage, it was stated that the same has not be saved in accordance with the provisions of Evidence Act.

¶10

It is further submitted that first bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 14.03.2024 and trial Court was directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same preferably within a period of one year but during trial only three witnesses have been examined so far, whereas 25 witnesses have been cited in the charge-sheet. The applicant is in jail since 13.05.2021 and thus he has already undergone detention of about 4 years and 5 months. It was submitted that trial of the case is likely to take sufficient long time. The case is based on circumstantial evidence. The applicant has no criminal history. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that applicant may be granted bail and that in case the applicant is

¶11

BAIL No. 11157 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in trial.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is evidence that deceased was last seen with applicant and that first bail application of applicant has already been rejected on merit.

¶15

Perusal of record shows that case is based on circumstantial evidence and there is eye-witness of alleged incident. Applicant has already undergone detention of about 4 years and 5 months and during trial only three witnesses have been examined so far. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations, particularly period of detention and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits, a case for bail is made out.

¶16

The bail application is allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant - Rahul Kumar Patel involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing each a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶18

i. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶19

ii. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate any of the prosecution witness.

¶20

iii. The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶21

iv. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶22

v. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicant in accordance with law.

¶24

October 10, 2025 'SP'/-

¶25

(Raj Beer Singh,J.)

¶26

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahul Kumar Patel v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Kumar Patel v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Satyam Upadhyay vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Abhishek Shukla Alias Golu and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Shaurabh Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Shiv Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay Tiwari vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ashish Tiwari @ Chhotu vs State of U.P.