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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail application allowed; applicant Ajay Rajpoot to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions: (i) appearance on dates fixed by the trial court, (ii) no tampering with prosecution evidence, (iii) no pressurizing of prosecution witnesses; liberty to the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail on breach of any condition.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Ajay Rajpoot, accused in Case Crime No. 196 of 2024 under Sections 309(4) B.N.S., Police Station Baar, District Lalitpur, is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.

Court's answer

On a prima facie view of the record, the applicant was not named in the first information report, there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery, and at this stage there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant, confined for almost five months with the charge-sheet already submitted and no hope of early conclusion of trial, and against whom no reasonable apprehension of tampering with evidence, delaying the trial or intimidating witnesses was brought to the fore by the State, is entitled to be enlarged on bail, without commenting on the merits of the case.

Key takeaways

Bail is granted on the applicant furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions that he shall appear on dates fixed by the trial court, shall not tamper with prosecution evidence and shall not pressurize prosecution witnesses; on breach of any condition the prosecution may move a bail cancellation application before this Court.ratio¶6

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail under Section 483 B.N.S.S. in Case Crime No. 196 of 2024, Sections 309(4) B.N.S., P.S. Baar, District Lalitpur - applicant not named in the first information report; arrested after fifteen days of the incident; alleged false recovery of ornaments of yellow and white metal with no independent witness; no credible evidence at this stage linking the applicant to the offence; in jail since 08.09.2024 (almost five months); charge-sheet filed with no hope of early conclusion of trial; no reasonable apprehension of tampering, delay or intimidation shown by the State - bail granted on personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount, with conditions of appearance, non-tampering and non-pressurizing of witnesses, and liberty to the prosecution to move for cancellation on breach; observations made without commenting on merits. (Vivek Varma, J.; Order Date 10.2.2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:19274)

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:19274

Court No. - 67

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4092 of 2025

Applicant :- Ajay Rajpoot Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nagendra Kumar Mishra, learned Brief Holder for the State-opposite party.

The instant bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 196 of 2024, under Sections 309(4) B.N.S., Police Station Baar, District Lalitpur during the pendency of the trial.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report. The applicant was arrested after fifteen days of the alleged incident and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of ornaments of yellow and white metal has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At this stage there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in Paragraphs-26 to 28 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 08.09.2024 and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At this stage there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for almost five months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would

either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Let the applicant- Ajay Rajpoot, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he:

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

Order Date :- 10.2.2025 SKT/-

Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad