Karan Singh vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:94465

Court No. - 48

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17054 of 2025

Applicant :- Karan Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Saif Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant involved in Case Crime No. 27 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 121(2), 132, 125, 324(5), 326(g), 61(2)(B), 109(1) BNS, Section 3/4 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S.- Roravar, District- Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant is not named in the first information report and his involvement was shown during investigation on the basis of statements of other accused persons. As per prosecution version, the residents of village Ibrahimpur have established the statue of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar on public land and when asked to remove the same, a mob has gathered and they have pelted bricks and stones at the police. Some police officials have sustained injuries. It was submitted that no police official has sustained any serious injury. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. Learned counsel has referred contents of the first information report and

¶9

statements of witnesses and submitted that there is no credible evidence against him. The applicant has no criminal history. It was submitted that similarly placed co-accused persons, namely, Tinku, Chhatrapal Singh, Ravi, Devendra Kumar, Raju Kumar, Sonu, Vinod Kumar, Keshav Dev, Devendra @ Deva, Sunny and Dharmendra have been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The applicant - accused is in judicial custody since 01.02.2025. It was submitted that in case applicant is granted bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would co-operate during trial.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that in the alleged incident several police officials have sustained injuries but it could not be disputed that similarly placed coaccused persons, namely, Tinku, Chhatrapal Singh, Ravi, Devendra Kumar, Raju Kumar, Sonu, Vinod Kumar, Keshav Dev, Devendra @ Deva, Sunny and Dharmendra have been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

¶11

I have considered rival submissions and perused the record.

¶12

It is well settled that at pre-conviction stage, there is presumption of innocence. The object of keeping a person in custody is to ensure his availability to face the trial and to receive the sentence that may be passed. The detention is not supposed to be punitive or preventive. Seriousness of the allegation or the availability of material in support thereof are not the only considerations for declining bail. In this connection reference may be made to case of Vinod Bhandari V State of M.P. (2015) 11 Supreme Court Cases 502.

¶13

In the instant matter, considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations, period of detention and all

¶14

attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits, a case for bail is made out. According bail application is allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant Karan Singh involved in aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶16

(i). The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

(ii). The applicant shall not pressurize / intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

(iii). The applicant shall appear before the Trial Court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶19

(iv). The applicant 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 2.6.2025 'SP'/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Karan Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karan Singh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sumit Tyagi vs State of U.P.

Gulam Sarwar vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Pramod Kumar Bind vs State of U.P.

Vijay Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Umesh Kumar Singh vs State of U.P.

Babloo Alias Aurangjeb Khan and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another