Jai Prakash Gautam vs State of U.P.

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.380 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station Mauaima, District Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is not named in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The named accused person was Nagendra only, but subsequently the applicant was nominated on the basis of statements of two witnesses, namely, Amzad Ali and Imran, but both the said witnesses have not been examined by the prosecution rather an application has been moved to discharge them from their evidence. It is alleged in the said application that they have colluded with the accused persons.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that there is no evidence against the applicant except the said statement of the deceased person before the two witnesses, who have not been examined by the public prosecutor, as such, it is a clear-cut case of false implication of applicant.

¶14

BAIL No. 7989 of 2025

¶15

2

¶16

There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 03.12.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶17

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant could not be disputed.

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that the applicant is not named in the FIR, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶19

Let the applicant- Jai Prakash Gautam , who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶20

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial.

¶21

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

¶22

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶24

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶25

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

¶26

November 26, 2025

¶27

(Ravi Kant)

¶28

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jai Prakash Gautam v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Prakash Gautam 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

Akash Gangwar vs State of U.P. and Another

Satendra vs State of U.P. and Another

Rohit Saroj vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Akash vs State of U.P.

Tapas Rai vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Haricharan Gaur vs State of U.P. and 3 Others