Mukesh Saroj vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35838

Court No. - 11

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4569 of 2025

Applicant :- Mukesh Saroj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Sarjoo Ram,Aklavya,Mohan Lal Maurya,Prashant Shekhar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 258 of 2019 under Sections 147, 148, 307, 323, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Raniganj, District- Pratapgarh.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and he is in jail since 03.04.2025. He further submits that co-accused - Chhotka @ Chhotki, having identical role, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.05.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4566 of 2025. In these circumstances, the applicant is also entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of the applicant for grant of bail, but he conceded the fact that co-accused - Chhotka @ Chhotki has already been granted bail by this Court.

¶11

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, contents of the F.I.R., other relevant documents, bail order of the co-accused - Chhotka @ Chhotki placed before this Court by learned counsel for the applicant (which is taken on record), ground of parity as well as totality of fact and circumstances, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Let applicant - Mukesh Saroj be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two

¶13

reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶15

(ii) 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.

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶17

(iv) 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 under Section 229-A IPC/269 BNS.

¶18

(v) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 B.N.S.S., may be issued and if 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 174-A IPC/209 BNS.

¶19

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

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

¶21

With above directions, the bail application is allowed .

¶22

Order Date :- 18.6.2025 Arpan

¶23

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

Mukesh Saroj v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Saroj v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

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

Ram Lakahn Verma @ Ram Lakhan vs Smt. Neha Awasthi, Chairman, Nagar Palika Parisad, Sitapur and Another

Naveen Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Chief Secy. Govt. of U.P., Lko. and 7 Others

Mahek Vimal Thru. Her Husband Satyam Verma @ Siddharth vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. and 5 Others

Nar Singh Soni vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Sunil Kumar vs Dr. Sudhir Kumar Regional Higher Edu. Officer Lko.

Rajendra Prasad vs Shri Ram Khelawan Nayab Tahsildar Shahganj Tahsil Bikapur District Ayodhya