Rahul Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:40360

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2861 of 2025

Applicant :- Rahul Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Vindeshwri Pandey,Gaurav Singh,Hemant Tripathi

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

Counter affidavit filed today by the State is taken on record.

¶8

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

¶9

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the marriage of the son of the informant was earlier fixed with the daughter of one Suryalal Gupta, which was scheduled to be held on 2.3.2025. On 30.1.2025 at about 10.00 pm in the night, the informant received a phone call from two unknown mobile numbers on his mobile and he was threatened to kill and Rs. 5 lakhs ransom was demanded. It is also alleged that the photograph of the girl with whom the son of the informant was due, was threatened to be made viral. It is further alleged that on 31.1.2025 at about 12.00 am in the midnight, a sutli bomb was thrown on the roof of the shop which burst loudly.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent. He is not named in the FIR which has been lodged after an inordinate delay of ten days without giving any explanation. There is no eye-witness account of the alleged incident. There is no one injured in the case.

¶11

It is further submitted that the applicant has duly explained his criminal history in para no. 17 of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 9.2.2025. 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.

¶12

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

¶13

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record so also the fact that there is no one injured in the case; the applicant has duly explained his criminal history; he is

¶14

languishing in jail since 9.2.2025; 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.

¶15

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶16

Let the applicant- Rahul Singh involved in Case Crime No. 10 of 2025, under Sections 308(5), 288, 351(3) of B.N.S., Police Station- Sadullanagar, District- Balrampur, 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:-

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

(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.

¶22

(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.

¶23

Order Date :- 15.7.2025 Shravan

¶24

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

Rahul Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Sudhakar Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home

Churamani Joshi (Retd. Company Commandar , Pno - 821040096) vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Pradeep Bot vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Santosh @ Santosh Kumar Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Kamlesh Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Mathiazhgan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.