Paltu Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:87118

Court No. - 67

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16544 of 2025

Applicant :- Paltu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Pal,Rajeev Kumar Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, seeking bail in Case Crime No. 264 of 2024, under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station-Civil Line, District Muzaffarnagar.

¶7

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.. He has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that no recovery has been made from the possession of the applicant. It is further submitted that charge sheet has been filed on 23.12.2024 and cognizance has been taken by the competent Court. It is further submitted that similarly placed co-accused Suresh has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 13.05.2025. The other co-accused Pradeep and Furkan have also been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.03.2025 and 18.03.2025 respectively. Therefore, the applicant may also be enlarged on bail. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and he is languishing in jail since 30.09.2024. It is also undertaken on behalf of the applicant that he shall abide by all terms and conditions as imposed by the Court while granting bail.

¶8

Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the instant bail application but he could not dispute the aforesaid facts as stated by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant.

¶9

Heard Sri Rajeev Kumar Pal, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri K. P. Pathak, learned AGA and perused the material available on record.

¶10

It is admitted fact that applicant is languishing in jail since 30.09.2024. Charge sheet has already been filed after completion of investigation. Cognizance has been taken by the

¶11

competent Court. No recovery has been made out from the possession of the applicant. Co-accused Suresh, Pradeep and Furkan have already been granted bail by this Court as stated above. It is also undertaken on behalf of applicant that he will abide by all terms and conditions as imposed by this Court while granting bail. No material brought on record by the learned A.G.A. that if the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will misuse the bail order.

¶12

Taking into consideration the aforesaid reasons as stated above, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I am inclined to allow the bail application. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant- Paltu, who is involved in the aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶14

(i). The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 BNSS. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate of 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.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶16

Order Date :- 22.5.2025 AKT

¶17

(Chandra Dhari Singh, J.)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Paltu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Paltu 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