Deepak Sharma Vs State of U.P.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26483 of 2025

Deepak Sharma

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Rohit Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 87

¶6

HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J.

¶7

Supplementary affidavit filed, today in Court, on behalf of applicant is taken on record.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶9

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Deepak Sharma with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.93 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 109, 118(1), 115(2), 351(2), 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station Govind Nagar, District- Mathura, during pendency of trial.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Accused applicant is languishing in jail since 16.6.2025. It is submitted that role and involvement of the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons has been assigned in the FIR. It is further submitted that in the statement of the injured recorded under Section 183 B.N.S. the accused applicant has been assigned the role of catching hold of the injured and the main role of causing injury has been assigned to the main accused namely, Kanhaiya @ Dhammo Pandit and Amit Sharma @ Dimpi. It is contended that accused applicant has not been assigned the role of causing injury to the injured with sharp weapon and no recovery has been shown from the possession of the applicant. It is argued that the main accused Kanhaiya @ Dhammo Pandit has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 29.5.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.14780 of 2025. Submission is that the applicant has criminal history of 11 cases which have been explained in para 11 of the bail application and

¶11

BAIL No. 26483 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶14

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail but could not dispute the aforesaid submissions.

¶15

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677 , considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that:-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶17

(ii) 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.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC/269 of BNS.

¶19

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of BNSS is issued and the applicants fail 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 IPC/209 of BNS.

¶20

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii)

¶21

BAIL No. 26483 of 2025

¶22

3

¶23

recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 of BNSS If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or 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.

¶24

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

¶25

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶26

September 16, 2025 RA

¶27

(Santosh Rai,J.)

¶28

Digitally signed by :- RAZIQ ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deepak Sharma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Sharma 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