Allowed

Pappu @ Serwari v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Apr 2025BAIL/3148/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought bail in a murder case where he was named only through the informant's second statement. Noting his co-accused had been released on bail, his clean record and time in custody, the court allowed bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties, with conditions to appear at trial, not tamper with evidence or witnesses, and abstain from criminal activity.

Pappu @ Serwari vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:44434

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3148 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Pappu @ Serwari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dev Prakash Sharma,Priyanka Devi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Ms. Priyanka Devi, learned counsel for the applicant and Jhamman Ram, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.184 of 2024, under Section 105 B.N.S., Police Station-Khanna, District- Mahoba, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits, nobody was named in the FIR but during investigation applicant has been made accused in the present matter along with co-accused Vijay Sharma through the second statement of the informant and after considering entire facts of the case in detail, co-accused Vijay Sharma has been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 14.2.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2912 of 2025 and on facts, case of applicant is at par with him.

¶9

He further submits that applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 28.12.2024.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶12

Considering the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that similarly placed co-accused Vijay Sharma has been released on bail by this Court and applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 28.12.2024, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on

¶13

bail.

¶14

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant- Pappu @ Serwari be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶20

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶21

Order Date :- 1.4.2025 Neeraj

¶22

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

Pappu @ Serwari v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu @ Serwari v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Subedar Patel Alias Dhoni vs State of U.P.

Manish vs State of U.P.

Akhlaque Ahmad and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Roshan vs State of U.P.

Bhagwan Patel vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shaukeen vs State of U.P.