Ramdev Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37370

Court No. - 11

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 731 of 2025

Applicant :- Ramdev Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Tiwari,Manoj Kumar Singh,Rakesh Kumar Saini Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Naresh Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard Sri R.K. Saini, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned AGA for the State and Sri Ram Naresh Singh, learned counsel for the complainant.

¶7

As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 29.12.2024 in FIR/Case Crime No.18 of 2004, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC, Police Station- Rehra Bazar, District Balrampur.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. As per the version of the FIR, the allegation in the First Information Report is that the daughter-in-law of the informant was enticed away by three persons, named in the FIR.

¶9

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is not named in the FIR and the person, who was named in the FIR, namely, Dhani Ram has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 06.02.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.14838 of 2023. Further, the matter pertains to the year 2004 and the criminal proceeding of the case was stayed in a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., instituted by the applicant and others challenging the chargesheet. Further submission is that the prosecution has failed to collect any cogent piece of evidence against the applicant and there is a doubt in the prosecution story so far as the role of the present applicant is concerned. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever.

¶10

Further submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that co-accused persons, namely, Babadeen, Bablu alias Badlu,

¶11

Amerika and Munnalal, having similar role, have been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 24.11.2023, 14.05.2025, 14.05.2025 & 14.05.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Applications No.13186 of 2023, 1112 of 2025, 1080 of 2025 and 1106 of 2025 respectively, therefore, on the basis of principles of parity, the present applicant may also be enlarged on bail. The applicant undertakes that he shall co-operate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court. Further, the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant have, however, opposed the prayer for bail but they could not dispute the submission of learned counsel for the applicant on the point of parity.

¶13

Without entering into merits of the issue; considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; contents and allegations of the FIR; the fact that named accused Dhani Ram has been granted bail by this Court and other co-accused persons, having similar role, have also been enlarged on bail; the applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever and undertaking of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶15

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

¶16

(i) 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. 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

(ii) 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 of the Indian Penal Code/ 269 of the B.N.S., 2023.

¶18

(iii) 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 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant

¶19

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 of the Indian Penal Code/ 208 of the B.N.S., 2023.

¶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 under Section 313 Cr.P.C./ 351 of the B.N.S.S., 2023. 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.

¶21

(v) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

¶22

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶23

Order Date :- 2.7.2025 RBS/-

¶24

Digitally signed by :- RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ramdev v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramdev v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

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

Mukesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Ashu Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Dr. Manish Chittranshi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Azad Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Narendra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Priyanka Ojha Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.