Allowed¶16

Pramod Sonkar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 Oct 2025BAIL/34683/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Court No. 68), order dated October 30, 2025 by Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava, J., allowing Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 34683 of 2025 (Pramod Sonkar v. State of U.P.) filed under Section 483 BNSS for bail in a Section 3(1) U.P. Gangsters Act case (Case Crime No. 0240 of 2025, P.S. Kotwali Katra, District Mirzapur); Section 19(4) of the Act and Section 2(b) gang-membership allegations considered; bail allowed on personal bond with two sureties and conditions; no expression on merits; no precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Pramod Sonkar released on bail in Case Crime No. 0240 of 2025 on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (i)-(v); breach of any condition to be a ground for cancellation of bail.

Pramod Sonkar vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, arraigned in Case Crime No. 0240 of 2025 under Section 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, is entitled to be released on bail during pendency of the trial. +1 more

¶8

Court's answer

Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and evidence reflected from the record, and taking into consideration Section 19(4) of the Act, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court found it a fit case for bail and allowed the bail application.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

Applicant Pramod Sonkar was ordered to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions including non-inducement/non-tampering with evidence, non-intimidation of prosecution witnesses, personal presence at opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of statement under Section 351 B.N.S.S., an undertaking not to seek adjournments when witnesses are present, and presence on each date personally or through counsel; breach of the conditions shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶16

Key takeaways

Anything said in the order is limited to the purpose of determination of the bail application and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits; the trial court is absolutely free to arrive at its own independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — Application under Section 483, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in Case Crime No. 0240 of 2025 under Section 3(1), Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Kotwali Katra, District Mirzapur — applicant in jail since 9.9.2025; two criminal-history cases stated to have been explained; State pointed out no other case — Court, considering totality of facts, nature and evidence on record along with Section 19(4) of the Act, and without expressing any opinion on merits, held it a fit case for bail — release directed on personal bond and two reliable sureties of like amount, subject to conditions (including presence under Section 351 B.N.S.S. and no adjournment undertaking); breach a ground for cancellation; observations confined to the bail determination, trial court free to reach independent conclusions.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34683 of 2025

¶3

Pramod Sonkar

¶4

	Versus .....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Kshitij Pal Singh, Santosh Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 68

¶6

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Arimardan Yadav, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

¶8

The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant Pramod Sonkar , with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 0240 of 2025, under Section 3(1) Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station Kotwali Katra, District Mirzapur, during pendency of the trial.

¶9

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. Two cases of criminal history have sufficiently been explained.

¶10

It is further submitted that the applicant is not a member or leader or organizer of a gang and he has not abetted or assisted in the activities of a gang as enumerated in clause (b) of Section 2 of the Act. Applicant has no criminal history except the aforesaid case. It is next submitted that there is also no possibility of the applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. The applicant, who is languishing in jail since 9.9.2025 undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of

¶11

BAIL No. 34683 of 2025

¶12

¶13

heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶14

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant, but has not pointed out any other case against the applicant except the cases shown by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶15

Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record and also taking into consideration the provision of Section 19(4) of the Act and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is allowed .

¶16

Let applicant, Pramod Sonkar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of 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 not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶19

(iii) 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 351 of B.N.S.S.

¶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 the trial court.

¶21

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

¶22

BAIL No. 34683 of 2025

¶23

¶24

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

¶25

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶26

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶27

October 30, 2025

¶28

Ravi Prakash

¶29

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

Pramod Sonkar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Sonkar 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nadeem vs State of U.P.

Ravi Singh vs State of U.P.

Chand vs State of U.P.

Aakash Kumar Bharti vs State of U.P.

Munna vs State of U.P. Though It Principal Secretary (Home)

Gufran Alias Pappu vs State of U.P.