Ravi Nishad vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30484 of 2025

Ravi Nishad

.....Applicant(s) Versus State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :

¶5

Court No. - 65

¶6

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

¶7

List has been revised.

¶8

Heard Sri Jai Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Varun Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶9

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.152 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 3(5) B.N.S, Police Station Jhunsi, District Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial.

¶10

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have taken away the brother of the informant forcibly in his car, whereby he alongwith other co-accused persons had committed his murder on 21.04.2025 at about 8:30 p.m.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about eleven hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. There is no eye-witness to the incident. Subsequently two witnesses of last scene are stated to have been created, but their statements are contradictory. The applicant has simply been made an accused on the basis of previous enmity.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is

¶13

BAIL No. 30484 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 23.04.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶16

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.

¶17

In the case of Thulia Kali vs The State of T.N. AIR 1973 SC 501 , the Supreme Court has held that the First information report in a criminal case is an extremely vital and valuable piece of evidence for the purpose of corroborating the oral evidence adduced at the trial. The object of insisting upon prompt lodging of the report to the police in respect of commission of an offence is to obtain early information regarding the circumstances in which the crime was committed, the names of the actual culprits and the part played by them as well as the names of eye witnesses present at the scene of occurrence. Delay in lodging the first information report quite often results in embellishment which is a creature of afterthought. On account of delay the report not only gets bereft of the advantage of spontaneity danger creeps in of the introduction of coloured version, exaggerated account, or concocted story as a result of deliberation and consultation.

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay in institution of FIR and the said statements of the witnesses, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶19

Let the applicant- Ravi Nishad , who is involved in aforementioned 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties

¶20

BAIL No. 30484 of 2025

¶21

3

¶22

be verified.

¶23

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

¶24

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

¶25

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶26

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

¶27

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶28

September 4, 2025

¶29

(Ravi Kant)

¶30

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

¶31

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ravi Nishad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Nishad 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

Similar cases

Komal Alias Hrishchandra vs State of Up and 3 Others

Ajay vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sonu vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Kusum vs State of U.P.

Santraj vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Singh vs State of U.P.