Abhishek Prajapati v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home, Lko.

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2025BAIL/11280/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) grants bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11280/2025 (FIR 490/2025, PS Chinhat, Sections 109(1), 3(5) BNS 2023) to Abhishek Prajapati on personal bond and two sureties with standard conditions; applicant in jail since 20.9.2025, no specific role in FIR, injury non-serious, no prior history.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on personal bond and two reliable sureties with conditions ¶¶17-¶23

Abhishek Prajapati vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home, Lko. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11280 of 2025

Abhishek Prajapati

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home, Lko.

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Yogendra Pal Anand, Krishna Kumar, Prabhat Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Court No. - 16

¶9

HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Balram Yadav, Advocate, who has filed his Power today on behalf of the complainant, which is taken on record and perused the record.

¶11

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Abhishek Prajapati, who is involved in F.I.R./Case Crime No.490 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 3(5) of BNS, 2023, Police Station-Chinhat, DistrictLucknow.

¶12

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. Learned counsel for applicant further submits that there is no role assigned to the applicant in the FIR and in the statement of Vinay Yadav, it is stated that he had fired on the injured and in the statement of Sonu Yadav, it is mentioned that the applicant was also involved in the case. However, there is no specific role assigned to the applicant. He further submits that the injury is also not serious. The applicant has no previous criminal history. It is lastly contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 20.9.2025.

¶13

Learned A.G.A and Sri Balram Yadav, have, however, opposed the

¶14

BAIL No. 11280 of 2025

¶15

¶16

prayer for grant of bail but they have not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the applicant to the extent that there is no specific role assigned to the applicant.

¶17

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶18

Let applicant- Abhishek Prajapati be released on bail in the aforesaid F.I.R./case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶19

(1) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

(2) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is 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 him in accordance with law.

¶21

(3) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶22

(4) The applicant will not indulge in any illegal activities during the period of bail.

¶23

(5) In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court would be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

¶24

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

¶25

December 1, 2025 Sachin

¶26

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Abhishek Prajapati v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home, Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Prajapati v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home, Lko.

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

Smt. Sunita @ Shiv Kumari vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Kaushal Kumar Agrawal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Padumnath vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Ram Bahadur Nishad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Arif vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Narendra Yadav and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another