Allowed¶16

Monti v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Nov 2025BAIL/35562/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Monti v. State of U.P.; Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 35562 of 2025; Allahabad High Court; Justice Ashutosh Srivastava; bail application allowed; S. 483 BNSS 2023; S. 136(1)(c) Electricity Act; S. 303(2) and S. 317(2) BNS 2023; Case Crime No. 78 of 2025; P.S. Bhaurakalan; District Muzaffar Nagar; personal bond and two reliable sureties; bail conditions; cancellation on breach.

What did the court decide?

Enlargement on bail of accused-applicant Monti on execution of a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (no tampering with evidence; no criminal activity; no pressurizing/intimidation of prosecution witnesses, cooperation in trial; regular appearance before the trial court), with liberty to the court below to cancel bail on breach. ¶16

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused-applicant Monti, involved in Case Crime No. 78 of 2025 (S. 136(1)(c) Electricity Act; S. 303(2) and S. 317(2) BNS 2023), Police Station Bhaurakalan, District Muzaffar Nagar, should be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial before the Court below.

¶9

Court's answer

Considering the nature of accusations, severity of punishment upon conviction, nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with witnesses and the prima facie case, but without commenting on the merit of the case, a case for bail is made out.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

The bail application is allowed and the accused-applicant Monti is to be released on bail on executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the conditions laid down in the order.

¶17

Key takeaways

Release is subject to conditions: the applicant shall not tamper with evidence, shall not indulge in any criminal activity, shall not pressurize/intimidate prosecution witnesses and shall co-operate in the trial, and shall appear regularly on each date fixed by the trial court unless exempted through counsel; upon breach of any condition, the court below is at liberty to proceed to cancel the bail.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Court No. 68), Ashutosh Srivastava, J., November 25, 2025 — Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 35562 of 2025 under S. 483 BNSS 2023 by Monti, accused in Case Crime No. 78 of 2025 (S. 136(1)(c) Electricity Act; S. 303(2) and S. 317(2) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023), Police Station Bhaurakalan, District Muzaffar Nagar; incident dated 1.9.2025, FIR lodged 3.9.2025, applicant in custody since 4.9.2025. Without commenting on the merits, and considering the accusations, severity of punishment, supporting evidence, apprehension of witness tampering and prima facie case, bail allowed: release on a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, subject to conditions of non-tampering with evidence, abstention from criminal activity, non-intimidation of prosecution witnesses with cooperation in trial, and regular attendance before the trial court; court below empowered to cancel bail on breach of any condition.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35562 of 2025

¶3

Monti

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State of U.P.		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Qamrul Islam Siddiqui, Tomar	Virendra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 68

¶7

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶8

Heard Shri Virendra Singh Tomar, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

¶9

This bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Monti, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 78 of 2025, under Sections 136 (1) (c) of Electricity Act and Section 303 (2) and 317 (2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Bhaurakalan, District Muzaffar Nagar, during the pendency of the trial before the Court below.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 4.9.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that incident is of dated 1.9.2025 and FIR has been lodged on 3.9.2025. There is no recovery from the possession of the applicant. He has four cases criminal antecedent, which have sufficiently been explained and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶11

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶12

Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima

¶13

BAIL No. 35562 of 2025

¶14

¶15

facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out.

¶16

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶17

Let the accused-applicant, Monti , involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶18

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶19

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶20

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶21

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶22

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶23

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶24

November 25, 2025

¶25

Ravi Prakash

¶26

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

Monti v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monti 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

Sarafaraj Alam Alias Nadeem vs State of U.P.

Pradeep vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sabuddin Alias Sabu Quraishi vs State of U.P.

Dharma Alias Dharmpal vs State of U.P.

Deepak vs State of U.P.

Rinku vs State of U.P. Thru. Home Secreatary ( Ministry of Home )