Lallan @ Nanku Gautam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lucknow

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:46801

Court No. - 12

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4321 of 2024

Applicant :- Lallan @ Nanku Gautam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Dilip Kumar Pandey,Amit Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the son of the informant namely, Ritin Kumar has not returned home till 06.00 pm on 17.10.2023. On 19.10.2023 at about 04.00 pm, his body was found hanging from a tree in the orchard of Mahesh. It is further alleged that someone has instigated him to commit suicide.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no evidence against the present applicant. The alleged recovery is false. He submits that the coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 24.7.2024 had directed the trial court to examine five witnesses shown at Sl. Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 17. Now, all these five witnesses have been examined before the trial court and they have been declared hostile.

¶9

It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 25.10.2023. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record so also the fact that the five prosecution witnesses shown at Sl. Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 17 have been declared hostile; there is no chance of tampering the evidence; the case appears to be of circumstantial evidence; the applicant has no criminal history; he is languishing in jail since 25.10.2023 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant- Lallan @ Nanku Gautam involved in Case Crime No. 554 of 2023, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station- Salon, District- Raebareli, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶18

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 B.N.S.S. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of B.N.S.

¶20

Order Date :- 11.8.2025 Shravan

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Lallan @ Nanku Gautam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lallan @ Nanku Gautam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lucknow

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

Sajan @ Ram Sanehi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Pravesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Wahid @ Popla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Kishan Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow and Anr.

Mahmood Alam Vs U.O.I. Thru. Zonal Director Narcotics Control Bureau Lko. Zonal Unit Lko.

Kanhaiya Lal Vs State of U.P.