Sahab Lal Chauhan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Court No. - 12

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1854 of 2025

Applicant :- Sahab Lal Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Kanaujia,Shyam Kinkar Pandey,Tufail Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed arising out of Case Crime No.366 of 2024, under Sections, 103(1) of BNS, Police Station- Tambore. District- Sitapur. The applicant is languishing in jail since 28.09.2024.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the applicant has not committed any offence and general allegation of assault and beating have been attributed against all the three accused persons including the applicant. There is no specific allegation against the applicant except last seen evidence, there is no other evidence. He submits that there is no eye witness to the incident and nothing was found in the viscera report. The applicant has no prior criminal history. Learned counsel for the applicant seeks bail on the ground of parity as the co-accused, Meera Devi, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 01.08.2025.

¶9

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not contradict the aforesaid submissions.

¶10

Perused the record.

¶11

On due consideration to the bail order of this Court in the case of Meera Devi, the applicant has no criminal history and the role assigned to the applicant, this Court finds it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant, Sahab Lal Chauhan, be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal

¶14

bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(iii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶19

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 269 of BNS).

¶20

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 209 BNS).

¶21

Order Date :- 21.8.2025 Haseen U.a

¶22

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

Sahab Lal Chauhan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahab Lal Chauhan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Pradeep Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and 3 Others

Ramu Alias Ram Kishore Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Dept. of Lko. and Another

Jitendra Singh @ Gudoo Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Pradeep Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ram Sajivan Rajak @ Ram Sajivan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Suraj Noniya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.