Ramnaresh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11787 of 2025

¶3

Ramnaresh

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Home Lko.	Secy. Deptt. Of		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Harsh Vardhan Sonkar, Ripu Dam : G.A.	Shahi, an Shah	Amit Kumar i

¶6

Court No. - 15

¶7

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶8

Order on Application for Amendment

¶9

Considering the contents of the application, under consideration, the same is liable to be allowed.

¶10

Accordingly, the amendment application is allowed.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted the make necessary amendments in the memo of bail application during course of the day.

¶12

Order on Bail Application

¶13

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant, Ms. Nirmala Yadav, Advocate, who has filed the Vakalatnama on behalf of complainant, which is taken on record as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶15

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of F.I.R. lodged on 29.07.2025 against five named persons including the applicants stating that while the informant's cousin was going to attend the call of nature at about 08:00 AM on 29.07.2025, all the accused persons assaulted him with lathi, danda, farsa, country-made pistol and country-made bomb because of an old animosity.

¶16

BAIL No. 11787 of 2025

¶17

2

¶18

It is further alleged that one of the co-accused was carrying a country-made pistol and that the applicant assaulted the victim with it, as a result of which the victim suffered injuries. The applicant has a criminal history of two cases, which has been duly explained in paragraph 13 of the bail application. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the site plan on record shows that the place of occurrence is in front of the house of the injured. The incident occurred when the victim came to attack the accused, and consequently, he sustained injuries due to the country-made pistol carried by him.

¶19

Learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail. Learned A.G.A. for the State submits that parts of a bomb were recovered from the place of occurrence.

¶20

In response, learned counsel for the applicant submits that no recovery has been made from the present applicant. He further submits that the injured suffered only superficial burn injuries and, therefore, was not admitted to the hospital. All the injuries are simple in nature and no fracture has been sustained. This fact could not be denied by the learned A.G.A. on the basis of the record.

¶21

The co-accused Naumilal and Dharmendra as well as Ravindra @ Ravendra, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 25.09.2025 and 14.11.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 9177 of 2025 and 10637 of 2025.

¶22

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶23

On due consideration of the facts that the applicant has been languishing in jail since 29.07.2025, he has explained the criminal history, the injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature and the bail orders of the coaccused named above, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶24

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶25

Let the applicant- Ramnaresh, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 0276 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 351(3), 352, 190, 191(2), 109 BNS & 3 of Explosive Substance Act, Police Station-Dariyabad, District-Barabanki, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶26

BAIL No. 11787 of 2025

¶27

3

¶28

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶29

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶30

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court.

¶31

Any other condition(s) which the trial court/concerned court may deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case, may also be imposed.

¶32

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial.

¶33

December 17, 2025 Vinay/-

¶34

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶35

Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ramnaresh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramnaresh v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Lal Bihari Pal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Raj @ Gabbar Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Pankaj @ Ramesh Gautam and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ramnaresh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Haneef @ Mohd. Haneef vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another