Allowed

Hanuman Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2025BAIL/41351/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application preferred by Hanuman Singh in a BN.S. case. Court granted bail after noting the applicant played no role in abduction, incurred no injuries, has no prior record, and poses no threat to the trial process after extended custody.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties in like amounts, subject to appearing at trial, not tampering with evidence, and not pressurizing witnesses.

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

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41351 of 2025

¶3

Hanuman Singh

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Balbir Singh, Shailendra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 64

¶7

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party.

¶9

The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 131 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 143(2), 87, 61(2), 351(2), 115(2) B.N.S., Police Station Naubasta, District Kanpur Nagar during the pendency of the trial.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has not been assigned the role of kidnapping, abduction or enticing the victim. Only the role of threatening and assault to the victim has been assigned to the applicant. Further, at the time of medical examination no external injury was found on the body of the victim. At this stage there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The case of the applicant is clearly distinguishable from that of other co-accused. The applicant is in jail since 09.04.2025 having no criminal history and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶11

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

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant has not been assigned the role of kidnapping, abduction or enticing the victim. Only

¶13

BAIL No. 41351 of 2025

¶14

¶15

the role of threatening and assault has been assigned to the applicant. At the time of medical examination no external injury was found on the body of the victim. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than seven 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.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶20

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

¶21

(Vivek Varma,J.)

¶22

December 1, 2025 SKT/-

¶23

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

Hanuman Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hanuman Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akram vs State of U.P.

Sumit vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anuj vs State of U.P.

Lalta Prasad vs State of U.P.

Arya Pratap Yadav @ Prince vs State of U.P.

Vansh Sharma vs State of U.P.