Allowed¶12

Ram Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC10 Nov 2025BAIL/586/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 12; Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 586 of 2025; Ram Kumar v. State of U.P.; decided November 10, 2025 by Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia, J.; bail granted in FIR No. 492 of 2022 under Sections 302, 201 IPC, P.S. Dalmau, District Raebareli; second bail application after rejection dated 11.09.2024; custody since 06.11.2022; no criminal antecedents; testimony of witnesses at Serial Nos. 31, 32, 37, 38, 39 and 40 recorded.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Ram Kumar to be released on bail on furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (a) attendance at hearings, (b) no similar offence, and (c) no inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts or tampering with evidence.

Ram Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 586 of 2025

¶3

Ram Kumar

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jaikaran Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Amit Tewari, Pawan Kumar Shukla

¶6

Court No. - 12

¶7

HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J.

¶8

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶9

2 . The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.492 of 2022, under Sections 302, 201 IPC, Police Station Dalmau, District Raebareli.

¶10

3 . This is the second bail application. The first bail application was rejected vide order dated 11.09.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.62963 of 2023. While rejecting the bail application, this Court had directed that the testimony of the witnesses shown at Serial Nos.31, 32, 37, 38, 39 and 40 were recorded. It is stated that the testimony of the said witnesses have now been recorded, which are on record. The said testimonies do not directly implicate the applicant and are subject matter of apprehension during trial. The applicant is in custody since 06.11.2022.

¶11

4 . Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer.

¶12

5. Considering the fact that the main fact witnesses have been examined coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 06.11.2022, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed

¶13

BAIL No. 586 of 2025

¶14

¶15

6. Let the applicant Ram Kumar be released on bail in the abovesaid first information report number on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶16

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶17

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶18

(c) 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.

¶19

(Pankaj Bhatia,J.)

¶20

November 10, 2025

¶21

akverma

¶22

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

Ram Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Kumar 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

Mithilesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Shivam Kori Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Sanjay Kumar Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Akhilesh Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Kuldeep Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Ajeet Kumar Sharma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another