Allowed¶17

Dhanraj and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Apr 2025BAIL/12635/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 12635 of 2025, decided 25.04.2025 by Dr. Gautam Chowdhary, J.; bail allowed for applicants Dhanraj and Dheeraj in Case Crime No. 94 of 2025, P.S. Iglas, District Aligarh, under Sections 275 and 325 B.N.S. and Section 11 of the Animal Cruelty Act, 1960; applicants claimed false implication due to enmity, no recovery from their persons, custody since 13.02.2025; release on personal bond with two local sureties each, subject to standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicants Dhanraj and Dheeraj released on bail in Case Crime No. 94 of 2025 on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions; trial court at liberty to cancel bail on breach of conditions. ¶17

Dhanraj and Another vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:64122

¶2

Court No. - 86

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12635 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Dhanraj And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pavan Kumar,Sandeep Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The accused applicants are involved in Case Crime No.94 of 2025, under Section 275, 325 B.N.S., and Section 11 of Animal Cruelty Act, 1960 Police Station Iglas, District Aligarh.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case on account of enmity for the purpose of harassment. Applicants have committed no offence. The applicants are workers of the contractor and that no recovery whatsoever has been made from the person of the applicants. The alleged recovery is false. Applicants are in jail since 13.02.2025 It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicants fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the applicants.-

¶10

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶11

Let the applicants Dhanraj and Dheeraj be released on bail in the aforementioned case crime number on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to

¶12

the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

i) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicants shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶14

iii) The applicants shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. v) The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

¶15

v) The applicants 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

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

¶17

The bail application is allowed.

¶18

Order Date :- 25.4.2025 S.Ali

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dhanraj and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhanraj 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

Shailesh Vishwakarma vs State of U.P.

Bhagat Singh vs State of U.P.

Shivnath Kanaujiya vs State of U.P.

Saumya Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Akash Yadav vs State of U.P.

Anil vs State of U.P. and 3 Others