Sonpal and Another vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:69544

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11533 of 2025

Applicant :- Sonpal And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Radhey Shyam Shukla,Vipul Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Radhey Shyam Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA for the Staterespondent.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicants on bail in S.T. No.34 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No.290 of 2024, under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station- Khutar, District- Shahjahanpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that however, applicants are real brother of the deceased and as per allegation, property dispute was pending between applicants and deceased and therefore, deceased committed suicide but entire allegations levelled against the applicants are totally false.

¶9

He further submits that even if due to property dispute arose between brothers, one brother committed suicide then it cannot be said that another brother is responsible for his death.

¶10

He further submits that there is absolutely no evidence of abetment against the applicants on record.

¶11

He further submits that applicants are not having any criminal history and they are in jail in the present matter since 20.12.2024.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicants.

¶13

I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶14

Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants and nature of allegations levelled against them and the fact that they are not having any criminal history and they are in jail in the present matter since 20.12.2024, in my view, applicants are entitled to be released on bail.

¶15

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶16

Let the applicants- Sonpal and Radheyshyam , 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 the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶17

(i) The applicants shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless their personal presence is exempted.

¶18

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

¶19

(iii) The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicants.

¶21

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶22

Order Date :- 1.5.2025 Zafar

¶23

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

Sonpal and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonpal and Another 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

Jogindar Nishad vs State of U.P. and Another

Vivek Sharma vs State of U.P.

Ankit Kashyap vs State of U.P.

Shivam vs State of U.P.

Bharat and 3 Others vs State of U.P.

Raj Kumar vs State of U.P.