Amit Rathaur Vs State of U.P.

This application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 1229 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109, 115(2), 352 BNS, Police Station- Baradari, District Bareilly.

¶11

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that in the FIR as well as in the statement of injured, general allegations have been made against all the accused persons including the applicant. He further submitted that co-accused Ram Gopal Mishra, having similar role to that of the applicant, has been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.31326 of 2025 vide order dated 22.09.2025. Therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. He further submitted that the applicant has explained the criminal history in para 21 of the affidavit and he is languishing in jail since 09.07.2025. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the parity of the applicant with co-accused Ram Gopal Mishra,, who has been enlarged on bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

¶13

BAIL No. 31204 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

Thus, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and taking into account of the fact that the similarly situated co-accused has been enlarged on bail and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶16

Let the applicant- Amit Rathaur involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:-

¶17

i. 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

ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶19

iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶20

iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed by him.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of downloaded copy of this order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.

¶24

It is directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to

¶25

BAIL No. 31204 of 2025

¶26

3

¶27

ensure early release of the applicant.

¶28

The Registrar (Compliance) of this Court is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned jail through e-mail or e-prison portal in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685 .

¶29

(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)

¶30

October 28, 2025 A.Kr.

¶31

Digitally signed by :- AJAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Amit Rathaur v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Rathaur 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