Allowed¶13

Sudhir Alias Totala v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Mar 2025BAIL/7537/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad HC bail granted; parity with co-accused Firoz (similar role, already bailed by coordinate Bench); Sections 303(2)/324(5)/62 of B.N.S.; s.150 Railway Act; Case Crime No. 25 of 2025; Police Station Gulaothi; District Bulandshahar; FIR registered 11.01.2025 against anonymous persons after theft of 10.11.2024; recovery without independent witness; charge-sheet stage bail; custody since 12.01.2025; Judge Avnish Saxena; order date 21.7.2025; Court No. 87; neutral citation 2025:AHC:118316.

What did the court decide?

Accused applicant to be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. ¶13

Sudhir Alias Totala vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:118316

¶2

Court No. - 87

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7537 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Sudhir Alias Totala Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shravan Kumar Pandey,Shyam Narain Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Avnish Saxena,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. has filed counter affidavit today in the Court, which is taken on record.

¶7

Sri S.N. Pandey, learned counsel appears for the applicant has filed rejoinder affidavit today in the Court, which is taken on record.

¶8

The present bail application has been moved by the applicantaccused Sudhir Alias Totala for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2), 324(5), 62 of B.N.S. and 150 of Railway Act, in Case Crime No. 25 of 2025, Police Station- Gulaothi, DistrictBulandshahar.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused has been falsely implicated in this case. The FIR has been registered after lapse of two months. The articles of the railway has been stolen on 10.11.2024, whereas the FIR has been registered on 11.01.2025 against anonymous persons. The recovery has been made in absence of the independent witness. The co-accused Firoz, having similar role, has already been granted bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court. The charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant. The criminal history of three cases has been explained in para 10 of the bail application. The applicant-accused is languishing in jail since 12.01.2025. As such, he prays that the accused/applicant be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the bail and submits that charge sheet is submitted against the accused-applicant.

¶11

Taken into consideration the rival submissions made by the parties and perused the record.

¶12

The perusal of the records reveal that the co-accused having similar role has already been granted bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court. The recovery was made in absence of independent witness. The charge sheet is submitted. The applicant is languishing in jail since January, 2025. Without touching the merit of the case, this bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the accused applicant be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶14

Order Date :- 21.7.2025 Mini

¶15

(Avnish Saxena,J.)

¶16

Digitally signed by :- MINI KANAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sudhir Alias Totala v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhir Alias Totala 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

Alok Kumar Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Dinesh Vishwakarma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Kishor Apchari ka through Mother vs State of Up and other

Anil Kumar Lodhi vs State of U.P.

Chotelal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Nafees vs State of U.P.