Santosh @ Chunbadiya vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:57110

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7486 of 2025

Applicant :- Santosh @ Chunbadiya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Dixit Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Amit Kumar Dixit, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri R. N. Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.131 of 2022, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Girwan, District Banda, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that however, applicant was named in the FIR alongwith co-accused Ram Naresh Tripathi and as per allegation, they committed the murders of mother and maternal grandmother of the informant but it is a case, in which there is no eye-witness account and merely on the basis of suspicion and motive, applicant has been made accused in the present matter alognwith co-accused Ram Naresh Tripathi.

¶9

He further submits that present case is of the year 2022 and applicant is in jail in the present matter since 08.07.2024 but he was not absconder and during investigation, as I.O. could not collect any cogent evidence against him, therefore, he did not arrest him.

¶10

He further submits that after considering the entire facts in detail, co-accused Ram Naresh Tripathi has been released on bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.11.2024

¶11

passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.10295 of 2024.

¶12

He further submits that however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of five other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application and however, in one case, which relates to offence under Section 302 I.P.C., applicant has been convicted but that case was of the year 1991 and in that case, he has been released on bail way back about more than two decades before and appeal filed by him is still pending before this Court.

¶13

He further submits that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 08.07.2024 i.e. for last more than nine months.

¶14

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of five other cases and he is convicted person too but he could not dispute the other arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant including the fact that except suspicion and motive, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record and similarly placed co-accused Ram Naresh Tripathi has been enlarged on bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

¶15

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

¶16

However, it is a case of double murder and as per allegation, applicant alongwith co-accused Ram Naresh Tripathi committed the murders of mother and maternal grandmother of the informant but it appears, there is no eye-witness account and on the basis of suspicion and motive, applicant and co-accused Ram Naresh Tripathi have been made accused in the present matter and after considering the entire facts in detail, co-accused Ram Naresh Tripathi has been released on bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and as far as allegation of murders is concerned, case of

¶17

applicant is at par with him.

¶18

Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of five other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application and however, it appears, in one case, which relates to offence under Section 302 I.P.C., applicant has been convicted but that case was of the year 1991 and it appears, appeal filed by applicant is still pending before this Court and in that case, applicant is on bail and as it appears, he was released on bail in that case about more than two decades before, therefore, in view of this Court merely on this basis, it is not proper to withheld his bail application specially considering the fact that it appears, there is no cogent evidence against him in the present matter.

¶19

Further, applicant is in jail in the present matter since 08.07.2024 i.e. for last more than nine months.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

Let the applicant- Santosh @ Chunbadiya , 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:-

¶23

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

¶24

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement,

¶25

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.

¶26

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

¶27

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.

¶28

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.

¶29

Order Date :- 17.4.2025 Zafar

¶30

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Santosh @ Chunbadiya v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh @ Chunbadiya 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sujeet vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Aman vs State of U.P.

Gagan vs State of U.P.

Rinku vs State of Up

Jakir Shah Alias Jakra vs State of U.P.

Manish Yadav vs State of U.P.