Anshul Solanki Alias Lalu vs State of U.P.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4884 of 2025

¶3

Anshul Solanki Alias Lalu

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Ajay Kumar Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 70

¶7

HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J.

¶8

This is second bail application. First bail application has been rejected by Hon.Mrs.Justice Sadhna Rani Thakur vide order dated 23.04.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.28901 of 2023.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Tripathi, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

¶10

This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant Anshul Solanki Alias Lalu seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.168 of 2021, under Sections 395, 397, 412 and 120-B I.P.C., P. S. Kamla Nagar, District Agra.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that false recovery has been shown against the applicant by the police personnel. No independent and reliable witness of the recovery was present at the time of preparation of recovery memo or arrest of the applicant. It is argued that co-accused Sachin has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 01.11.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.39777 of 2021. It is further argued that applicant has no criminal history and he is in jail since 27.07.2021. Thus his incarceration is about four years and five months but statement of only one witness Vijay Narbariya has been recorded in 2023 and examination-in-chief has not been completed yet. Statement of the witness has been placed on record by filing supplementary affidavit. Further submission is that the conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has 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. In case the

¶13

BAIL No. 4884 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶16

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 SSC 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 heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that:-

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the court concerned.

¶20

(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

December 1, 2025 Asha

¶25

(Santosh Rai,J.)

¶26

Digitally signed by :- ASHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anshul Solanki Alias Lalu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anshul Solanki Alias Lalu v. State of U.P.

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

Asif Shaikh vs State of U.P.

Akash Dev Alias Akash Alias Raja vs State of U.P.

Dilip Kumar vs State of U.P.

Pawan Nigam Alias Sahil Nigam vs State of U.P.

Krishnachandra Rajput vs State of U.P.

Shivam @ Golu Ahirwar vs State of U.P.