Allowed

Ram Sajivan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC8 Sept 2025BAIL/12575/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail application filed by the applicant in a case involving offences under Sections 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, and 471 IPC. The applicant was released on bail on the ground of parity, as two co-accused had already been granted bail in the same case.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to personal bond and two sureties, with conditions not to tamper with evidence or pressurize witnesses.

Ram Sajivan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12575 of 2024

Ram Sajivan

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

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

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manish Kumar Tripathi, Aditya Vikram Singh, Chandan Srivastava, Pranshu Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 13

¶9

HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.

¶10

Heard Shri Chandan Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Virendra Kumar, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the records.

¶11

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.345 of 2024, under Sections 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, registered at Police Station Gosaiganj, District Lucknow.

¶12

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 30.08.2024 against 8 persons, including the applicant, stating that the informant has agreed to purchase Plot No. C29 (ND-129) measuring 1500 sq. ft. from Reality Investment Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (Nirvana), Lucknow and he paid Rs.3,64,000/-, which was more than half of the agreed sale consideration, but possession of the land was not delivered. Thereafter, a sale deed was executed by Ram Sajivan, Director of the Company, and possession of the plot was delivered to the informant's husband but later on it transpired that the property transferred to the complainant's husband was in Khasra No.474 and not in Khasra No.478.

¶13

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history.

¶14

Two co-accused persons Ankit Khare and Balvir Singh has been granted bail in the present case by means of orders dated 30.01.2025 and 04.09.2025 passed in Bail Application Nos.849 of 2025 and 47829 of 2024.

¶15

BAIL No. 12575 of 2024

¶16

¶17

Learned A.G.A.-I has opposed the bail application but he could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶18

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime on the ground of parity.

¶19

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶20

Let the applicant - Ram Sajivan - be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

September 8, 2025 S. Shivhare

¶25

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶26

Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Sajivan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Sajivan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ravi Singh Alias Nankulli Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Sharwan Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Pinki Thru. Her Husband Shailendra Sharma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt.Lko. and 2 Others

Ram Sajivan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sandeep Maitee vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Sandeep Maitee vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko