Rahul vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Rahul vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail granted: applicant to be released on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (including no tampering with evidence/threatening witnesses, undertaking against adjournments when witnesses present, presence before Trial Court on dates fixed and at opening of case/framing of charge/Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. statement, with statutory default consequences); breach of conditions a ground for cancellation; identity and residence proof of applicant and sureties to be verified before bonds accepted.

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused-applicant Rahul should be enlarged on bail in Special Case No.217 of 2017 (Case Crime No.336 of 2017, Sections 392, 411 IPC, Police Station Ekdil, District Etawah).

Court's answer

Finding force in the submissions of the applicant's counsel, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (no tampering with evidence or threatening witnesses; undertaking not to seek adjournments when witnesses are present; presence before the Trial Court on each date fixed, with default consequences under Section 229-A IPC/269 BNS, Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 BNSS and Section 174-A IPC/209 BNS; personal presence at opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S.); breach of conditions to be a ground for cancellation of bail; identity and residence proof of applicant and sureties to be verified before bonds are accepted.

Ratio / Principle

Bail was granted keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial, the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, paragraph 53 of the Apex Court decision in Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement, and 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by undertrials.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (Santosh Rai, J.), Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 34251 of 2025, decided October 7, 2025 — Bail granted to accused-applicant Rahul in Special Case No. 217 of 2017 (Case Crime No. 336 of 2017, Sections 392, 411 IPC, P.S. Ekdil, District Etawah). Applicant in jail since 8.10.2024, in judicial custody since 2021 in other criminal cases, and taken into custody in the present case by way of remand during trial; previous bail conditions not violated; criminal history explained in paras 8 and 14 of the bail application. Finding force in the applicant's submissions, and considering the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial, the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, paragraph 53 of Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement (2024, SC) and 5-6 times overcrowding of jails by undertrials, the Court released the applicant on bail on a personal bond with two sureties, expressly without expressing any opinion on merits, subject to conditions: no tampering with evidence or threatening witnesses; undertaking not to seek adjournments when witnesses are present; presence before the Trial Court on each date (default attracting Section 229-A IPC/269 BNS); misuse of bail attracting proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 BNSS and proceedings under Section 174-A IPC/209 BNS; personal presence at opening of the case, framing of charge and Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. statement; breach of conditions a ground for cancellation of bail; identity and residence proof of applicant and sureties to be verified before bonds are accepted.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34251 of 2025

Rahul

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Amit Kumar Singh, Km Astha
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 70

HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J.

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

This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant Rahul seeking enlargement on bail in Special Case No.217 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No.336 of 2017, under Sections 392, 411 IPC, Police Station- Ekdil, District- Etawah.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused-applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. Applicant is languishing in jail since 8.10.2024. It is submitted that the applicant was on bail in this case from the court below but he was in jail since 2021 in other criminal cases. It is further submitted that during proceeding of the present trial, the applicant was taken into custody in this case by way of remand and he has not violated the previous bail conditions. It is argued that the criminal history of the accused applicant has been explained in para 8 and 14 of the bail application. It is further argued that the conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long and there is no likelihood of accused applicant fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the applicant is a habitual offender but he admits that the applicant is in judicial custody since 2021 on the basis of facts which are mentioned in other bail orders of the accused applicant.

BAIL No. 34251 of 2025

2

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the paragraph no.53 of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2024, (SC) LawSuit 677 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that:-

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

(ii) 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.

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC/269 BNS.

(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of BNSS 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 174-A IPC/209 of BNS.

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 of B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

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

BAIL No. 34251 of 2025

3

cancellation of bail.

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

October 7, 2025 RA

(Santosh Rai,J.)

Digitally signed by :- RAZIQ ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad