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

The present application has been filed on behalf of the applicants seeking bail in Case Crime No. 346 of 2025, under Sections- 303(2), 317(2), 317(4), 318(2) B.N.S. and Section 66-C, 66-D IT Act, Police Station-Kotwali Ayodhya, District-Ayodhya.

¶13

While pressing the present application, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case.

¶14

It is further submitted that based on a single arrest, the applicants have been implicated in as many as seven cases, the details of which have been explained in paragraph 8 of the bail application. Except for these seven cases arising from the same arrest, the applicants have no other criminal history.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

BAIL No. 9559 of 2025

¶18

2

¶19

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

¶20

Learned counsel further points out that co-accused Rahul Mandal has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 10.10.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9737 of 2025.

¶21

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

¶22

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application; however, he could not dispute the submissions made on behalf of the applicants, including the fact that a co-accused has already been granted bail.

¶23

Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A., and upon perusal of the record, including the F.I.R. and other relevant documents, and taking into account that the coaccused has already been granted bail by the Court concerned, as well as the role assigned to the applicants, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, finds substance in the present application. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶24

Let the applicants- Bunty Mandal and Chhotu Mahto 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 following conditions :-

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

(iii) The applicants will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es).

¶28

(iv) The applicants shall not commit an offence.

¶29

(v) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to

¶30

BAIL No. 9559 of 2025

¶31

3

¶32

dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶33

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

¶34

(vii) The applicants will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court.

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

As this order relates to enlargement of the applicants 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 in this order.

¶38

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶39

October 15, 2025 R.C.

¶40

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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