Rampal Singh vs State of U.P.

1. Heard Sri Yatindra and Sri Ajay Singh, learned counsels for the applicant and Sri B.P. Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶11

2. Present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0225 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 323, 336(2), 336(3), 337, 338, 340(2), 61(2) B.N.S. and 3/4 of Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station Pallavpuram, District Meerut with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶12

3. At the very outset, learned A.G.A. submits that he has not received any instructions as yet.

¶13

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant submits that present application was filed on 4.10.2025 and it has been heard on previous dates and learned AGA was not having instructions on the last date also. He futher submits that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case. It is further submitted that no offence is made out against the applicant. It is also submitted that the applicant is an employee of co-accused Ashish Gupta and Aditya Gupta. It is also submitted that co-accused Ashish Gupta and Aditya Gupta who are developers have executed the the development plan in excess of sanctioned map. It is also submitted that arrest of the co-accused Ashish Gupta and Aditya Gupta has been stayed

¶14

NABAIL No. 8196 of 2025

¶15

2

¶16

by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.8.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17530 of 2025. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶17

5. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra , (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, the Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶18

6. Considering the above submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and without expressing any opinion on merits, the applicant- Rampal Singh involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned till 3.12.2025 with the following conditions :-

¶19

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned;

¶20

(ii) 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶21

(iii) The applicant would cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of interim interim anticipatory bail bail.

¶22

(iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned.

¶23

NABAIL No. 8196 of 2025

¶24

3

¶25

7. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant herein.

¶26

8. List this case as fresh on 3.12.2025.

¶27

9. In the meantime, learned AGA may obtain instructions in the matter.

¶28

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶29

November 4, 2025

¶30

Abhishek

¶31

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rampal Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rampal Singh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ramesh Chandra vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sangeeta Gupta vs Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, Additional District Judge Court NO.3

S.I. Indu Bhushan and 27 Others vs Mr Sanjay Prasad

Sudesh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Diwari Lal vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nazim vs State of U.P. and Another