Thakara Ram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44454

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2776 of 2025

Applicant :- Thakara Ram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Romit Seth Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the Fortuner car of the complainant has been stolen on 16.11.2023 at about 03.00 am by unknown thieves.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the alleged recovery of car shown from the possession of the applicant at Balotra, Rajasthan is false. No test identification parade has been conducted. He submits that the allegation of forging the number plate of vehicle is false.

¶9

It is further submitted that the alleged offences are triable by a Magistrate. The applicant has duly explained the criminal history of six cases in para no. 29 of the bail application. He is languishing in jail since 20.4.2024. Charge-sheet in the case has been filed. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record so also the fact that the alleged offences are triable by a Magistrate; the applicant has duly explained the criminal history; he is languishing in jail since 20.4.2024; charge-sheet in the case has been filed and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant- Thakara Ram involved in Case Crime No. 458 of 2023, under Sections 379, 411, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC

¶14

Police Station- Gudamba, District- Lucknow, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶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 in accordance with law.

¶20

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 B.N.S.S. 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 209 of B.N.S.

¶21

Order Date :- 31.7.2025 Shravan

¶22

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

Thakara Ram v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thakara Ram 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dhirendra Alias Baba Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Harikesh Verma (in Id Harikesh) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Lko. and Another

Mohd. Asgar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Maneesh Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy, Deptt. of Home Lko.

Durga Prasad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Umashankar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.