Adarsh Mishra @ Salonay vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:19925

Court No. - 67

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2640 of 2025

Applicant :- Adarsh Mishra @ Salonay Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.281/2024, under Sections 331(4), 305, 317(2), 317(4), 61(2) of B.N.S., Police Station Kotwali, District Gorakhpur during the pendency of trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant was not named in the first information report. The applicant was arrested after ten days of the alleged incident alongwith three other coaccused and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of Rs.8,00,000/- has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Recovery of a Samsung mobile phone has also been shown from the applicant. The said mobile phone belongs to him. At this stage, there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph-26 of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 03.11.2024 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid facts from the record.

¶10

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At present there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant has remained confined for more than three months and there is no hope

¶11

of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Let the applicant, Adarsh Mishra @ Salonay involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:

¶13

i. the applicant shall not temper with the prosecution evidence;

¶14

ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; and,

¶15

iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶17

Order Date :- 11.2.2025 Radhika

¶18

Digitally signed by :- RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Adarsh Mishra @ Salonay v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adarsh Mishra @ Salonay 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

Ajay Rajpoot vs State of U.P.

Roshan Nishad vs State of U.P.

Lakhan Meena vs State of U.P.

Parvej vs State of U.P.

Ganesh Pratap Singh vs State of U.P.

Suresh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others