Santosh Mandal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

The present application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 313 of 2025, under Sections 303(2), 317(2), 317(4), 318(2) B.N.S. and Sections 66-C, 66-D of the IT Act, Police Station Kotwali Ayodhya, District Ayodhya.

¶12

While pressing the present application, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case.

¶13

It is further submitted that on the basis of a single arrest, the applicant has been implicated in as many as seven cases. Except seven cases arising from the same arrest, the applicant has no other criminal history.

¶14

Learned counsel further contends that the recovery memo, which lacks any independent public witness, indicates that from the possession of the applicant, the prosecution has allegedly shown recovery of two mobile phones and Rs. 1,25,000/- each. The total number of persons shown as arrested in the recovery memo is five, including the present applicant.

¶15

It is also submitted that the recovery memo is not in accordance with the procedure prescribed under Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha

¶16

BAIL No. 9550 of 2025

¶17

2

¶18

Sanhita (B.N.S.S.).

¶19

It is further submitted that considering the aforesaid facts, the applicant, who is in custody since 28.06.2025, deserves to be released on bail. It is assured that, if released, the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail, will cooperate in the trial, and will not attempt to influence the prosecution witnesses. Hence, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶20

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application.

¶21

Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A., and upon perusal of the record, including the F.I.R. and other relevant documents, as well as the role assigned to the applicant, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, finds substance in the present application. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶22

Let the applicant, Santosh Mandal, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶23

(i) The applicant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial.

¶24

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.

¶25

(iii) The applicant will not pressurize or intimidate the prosecution witness(es).

¶26

(iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence.

¶27

(v) 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.

¶28

(vi) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel.

¶29

(vii) The applicant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for

¶30

BAIL No. 9550 of 2025

¶31

3

¶32

evidence when the witnesses are present in court.

¶33

(viii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶34

In case of default of the above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of the liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶35

As this order relates to the enlargement of the applicant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case, and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made herein.

¶36

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶37

October 15, 2025 R.C.

¶38

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Santosh Mandal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Mandal 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

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

Virendra Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko.

Ankit Kashyap Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Bunty Mandal and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Ansit Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home and 3 Others

Mu. Saheedun Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.