Mohit Singh and Another vs State of U.P.

This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicants, Mohit Singh and Shyam Singh seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.375 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) B.N.S, Police Station- Khutar District- Shahjahanpur.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the accused-applicants have not committed any offence as alleged in the First Information Report. It is further submitted that Rs. 20,000/- was misappropriated in this case but they have not created any forged document etc. He has further submitted that so called milk purchase agreement was done between the parties only to purchase the milk. There was no provision to supply instrument etc in this case. Photocopy of Milk Purchase Agreement Madhusudan Dairy is on record. From the perusal of the aforesaid document, it appears that there is no signature of buyer and seller and one witness Mohd. Unus is shown therein. From the perusal of the case diary, it appears that accused applicants had taken Rs. 20,000/from informant Sumit Kumar Trivedi and other victims. There is no reliable documentary evidence related to the fact that applicants have taken Rs. 20,000/- from the informant. The matter related to mutual transaction and the accused applicants have no criminal history to their credit. They have been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and are languishing in jail since 07.09.2025. It is argued that there is no reasonable possibility of intimidating or pressurizing the prosecution

¶11

BAIL No. 36712 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

witnesses. 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.

¶14

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.

¶15

Considering the fact that the accused applicants are in jail since 07.09.2025 and have no criminal history; 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 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-applicants, Mohit Singh and Shyam Singh involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on their 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

i. The applicants will not tamper with the evidence.

¶19

ii. The applicants will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶20

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

¶21

iv. The applicants will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless their 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

(Santosh Rai,J.)

¶24

October 27, 2025 Gss

¶25

Digitally signed by :- GIRAJA SHANKER SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohit Singh and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohit Singh and Another 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dinesh Sharma vs State of U.P.

Bhupendra Verma vs State of U.P.

Kapil Patel vs State of U.P.

Jwala Yadav @ Ranjeet Yadav vs State of U.P.

Satish Kumar Chaubey vs State of U.P.

Sachin Chauhan vs State of U.P.