Vishal Kumar vs State of U.P. Though It Principal Secretary (Home)Lucknow

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:33493

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4458 of 2025

Applicant :- Vishal Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Though It Principal Secretary (Home)Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

. Heard Sri Atul Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Santosh Pandey, learned brief holder for the State-respondent.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 178 of 2024, under Sections 302, 201, 34 IPC, Police Station- Titavi, District- Muzaffar Nagar, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and applicant was not named in the FIR and during investigation, his involvement was surfaced through the statement of informant and this fact itself suggests that during investigation, applicant has been falsely made accused in the present matter. He further submitted that even FIR was lodged after one and half months.

¶9

He further submitted that co-accused Rajnish Alias Chhota was even named in the FIR along with co-accused Mukul and both the above named co-accused persons have been released on bail by this Court vide orders dated 06.02.2025 and 14.02.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 45270 of 2024 and 1852 of 2025 respectively and on facts, case of applicant is at better footing than them.

¶10

He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 10.11.2024.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶13

It is a case of circumstantial evidence and it appears, during investigation name of the applicant was surfaced in the present matter through the statement of informant recorded during investigation.

¶14

Record suggests that except the evidence of last seen, there is no cogent evidence against the applicant on record.

¶15

Record also suggests that co-accused Rajnish Alias Chhota and Mukul were named in the FIR and there was also evidence of last seen against them and they have already been released on bail by this Court. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since November, 2024.

¶16

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶17

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶18

Let the applicant- Vishal Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶19

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶20

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶23

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶24

Order Date :- 7.3.2025/KK Patel

¶25

Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vishal Kumar v. State of U.P. Though It Principal Secretary (Home)Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishal Kumar v. State of U.P. Though It Principal Secretary (Home)Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Phool Chandra Alias Gangu vs State of U.P. and Another

Jay Kumar vs State of U.P.

Rustam vs State of U.P.

Parvez Alias Ishtiyaq Ali vs State of U.P.

Rahul vs State of U.P.

Rubina Begum vs State of U.P.