Ramautar @ Sunil vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ramautar @ Sunil vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Ramautar @ Sunil ordered released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions: (i) not to tamper with prosecution evidence; (ii) not to pressurize prosecution witnesses; (iii) to appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. In case of breach, prosecution is at liberty to move a bail cancellation application before this Court.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, facing trial in Case Crime No. 266 of 2024 (Section 109 B.N.S., P.S. Awagarh, District Etah), is entitled to be enlarged on bail, considering the nature of injury shown in the medical report (injuries on the left hand, urged by counsel to show no intent to murder) and whether there is substantive evidence linking the applicant to the offence. +1 more

Court's answer

This Court prima facie finds, according to the medical report, that the injured/informant sustained injuries on the left hand.

Ratio / Principle

At this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence.

Key takeaways

The applicant has remained confined for more than four months with no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension was brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses.ratio¶14
Without commenting on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Hon'ble Vivek Varma, J.), Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 42436 of 2025, decided December 2, 2025 — Bail granted. Applicant Ramautar @ Sunil, in custody since 11.7.2025 in Case Crime No. 266 of 2024, under Section 109 B.N.S., Police Station Awagarh, District Etah, enlarged on bail during pendency of trial. Court prima facie found per the medical report that the injured/informant sustained injuries on the left hand (counsel contending the nature of injury showed no intent to murder) and that at this state there was no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Noting confinement exceeding four months, no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension advanced by the State of evidence-tampering or witness-intimidation, and without commenting on the merits, the Court held the applicant entitled to bail on a personal bond and two like sureties, subject to conditions of not tampering with prosecution evidence, not pressurizing prosecution witnesses, and appearance on every date fixed by the trial court; breach entitles the prosecution to seek cancellation before this Court.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42436 of 2025

Ramautar @ Sunil

	Versus	.....	Applicant(s)
State of U.P.			.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Onkar	Nath
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

Court No. - 64

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri N.K. Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 266 of 2024, under Section 109 B.N.S., Police Station- Awagarh, District- Etah during pendency of the trial.

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The informant is the father of the applicant. As per the first information report, the applicant is alleged to have caused firearm injury to the informant. According to the medical report, the injured/informant sustained injuries on the left hand. It is contended that the nature of the injury shows that there was no intent to murder. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 3 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 11.7.2025. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

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

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that according to the medical report, the injured/informant sustained injuries on the left hand. It is contended that the nature of the injury shows that there was no intent to murder. At this state, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence.

BAIL No. 42436 of 2025

2

Further the applicant has presently remained confined for more than four months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when 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 intimidate the witness, 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, Ramautar @ Sunil involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:

i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness;

iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

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

(Vivek Varma,J.)

December 2, 2025 S.S.

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad