Vipin Kumar Pal Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

Vipin Kumar Pal Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release of applicant Vipin Kumar Pal on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to three conditions (no tampering with prosecution evidence or intimidation/pressurisation of witnesses during investigation or trial; sincere cooperation in the trial without seeking adjournments; no indulgence in criminal activity after release); breach of any condition constitutes ground for cancellation of bail, and identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties to be verified by the court concerned before bonds are accepted.

Issue for consideration

Whether accused-applicant Vipin Kumar Pal, booked in Case Crime No. 68 of 2024 under Section 8/22 of the N.D.P.S. Act (Police Station Jansath, District Muzaffarnagar), should be enlarged on bail in his second bail application moved under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, against the State of U.P.

Court's answer

Weighing the facts of the case, the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution, the nature of accusations and of the evidence supporting them, the severity of punishment conviction would entail, the character of the accused-applicant and circumstances peculiar to him, the reasonable possibility of securing his presence at trial, the apprehension of witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/State and the status of trial — but expressly without expressing any opinion on the merits — the court held it a fit case for grant of bail.

Ratio / Principle

The bail application was accordingly allowed: the applicant, Vipin Kumar Pal, is to 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 conditions that he shall not tamper with prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurising witnesses, shall cooperate sincerely in the trial without seeking adjournments, and shall not indulge in any criminal activity after release; breach of any condition is a ground for cancellation of bail, and the identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties must be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail allowed — High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Court No. 66), Ashutosh Srivastava, J., September 16, 2025 (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 21989 of 2025). Second bail application under Section 483, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by accused-applicant Vipin Kumar Pal for enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 68 of 2024, Section 8/22 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Jansath, District Muzaffarnagar, opposed by State of U.P. His first bail application had been rejected on 04.02.2025 (Bail Application No. 32718 of 2024). Chargesheet was submitted on 07.08.2024; applicant in jail since 23.09.2024 with no criminal history; counsel contended the trial was proceeding at snail's pace with no witness yet examined (ordersheet annexed at page 99). AGA opposed but did not dispute counsel's submissions. Considering the nature of accusations and evidence, severity of punishment, character of the accused, possibility of securing his presence at trial, apprehension of witness tampering, larger public/State interest and status of trial — without expressing any opinion on the merits — the court deemed it a fit case for bail and allowed the application: release on a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions forbidding witness tampering, requiring sincere cooperation in trial without adjournments and abstention from criminal activity; breach of any condition is a ground for cancellation, with identity, status and residence proof of applicant and sureties to be verified before bonds are accepted.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21989 of 2025

Vipin Kumar Pal

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gaurav Kakkar, Raghvendra Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 66

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

This is the second bail application moved on behalf of the applicant.

The first bail application of the applicant was rejected vide order dated 04.02.2025 by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 32718 of 2024.

Rejoinder affidavit as well as counter affidavit filed in the Court today are taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Punit Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

This bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Vipin Kumar Pal, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 68 of 2024, under Section 8/22 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station- Jansath, DistrictMuzaffarnagar.

Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that on 07.08.2024, chargesheet has been submitted by the Investigating Officer in the matter. Learned counsel for the applicant draws the attention of the Court towards the ordersheet of the court below which is annexed at page 99 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, wherein it is apparent that trial is proceeding at snail's pace as no witness has yet been examined. The applicant, who is in jail since 23.09.2024 having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail. In case the applicant is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

BAIL No. 21989 of 2025

2

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant, but could not dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant.

Considering the facts of the case, larger mandate of Article 21 of the constitution of India, the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused-applicant, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/ State and other circumstances, status of trial, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

Let the applicant, Vipin Kumar Pal , involved in abovesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

September 16, 2025 Anjali

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

Digitally signed by :- ANJALI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad