Allowed

Karamjeet Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Dec 2025BAIL/43635/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, while not expressing an opinion on the merits of the criminal charges, granted bail to the applicant in a BNS case. The court issued a personal bond with conditions against tampering with evidence and non-appearance in court.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with conditions regarding presence in court, prohibition on tampering with witnesses, and undertaking to seek no adjou

Karamjeet 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. - 43635 of 2025

¶3

Karamjeet Singh

¶4

	...	..Applicant(s)
State of U.P.		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Vinay Kumar	Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 70

¶6

HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned AGA, Shri Vijendra Kumar Tripathi, for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Karamjeet Singh with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 382 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(2), 340(2) of BNS, Police Station Meerganj, District Bareilly during pendency of trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further submits that F.I.R. of the offence has been lodged against the driver of vehicle HR 58C 1874 and it has been stated in the F.I.R. that some unknown person filled up 328.30 ltr. diesel amounting Rs. 28900/- in his vehicle and fled away without paying the amount. He further submits that name of applicant came into light on the basis of CCTV footage. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that applicant has already paid the Rs. 30,000/- in cash to the sales man of the petrol pump, he has been falsely implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He further submits that a concocted and false story has been set up by the prosecution whereas the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that there is criminal history of applicant and the same has been explained in para no. 2 and 3 of the supplementary affidavit filed

¶10

BAIL No. 43635 of 2025

¶11

¶12

in support of the bail application. He further submits that trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. Applicant is languishing in jail since 25.07.2025.

¶13

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. He further submits that charge-sheet has already been filed in the instant matter.

¶14

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering paragraph no.53 of Apex Court in case of Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2024 (SC) LawSuit 677, dictum of Apex Court in Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb (2021) 3 SCC 713 & Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. (2022) 10 SCC 51 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that:-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶16

(ii) 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.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each

¶18

BAIL No. 43635 of 2025

¶19

¶20

date fixed, either personally or as directed by the court concerned. (iv) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement of accused personally to explain circumstances appearing in the evidence against him.

¶21

(v) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him strictly in accordance with law.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail by the trial court.

¶23

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶24

(Santosh Rai,J.)

¶25

December 10, 2025

¶26

Bhanu

¶27

Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Karamjeet Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karamjeet 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naveen Singh vs State of U.P.

Jagroshni vs State of U.P.

Najakat vs State of U.P.

Ramkeval vs State of U.P.

Ayan @ Annan vs State of U.P.

Ashish Singh vs State of U.P.