Allowed

Ramkishor v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Nov 2025NABAIL/8628/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous anticipatory bail application under Sections 103(1), 3(5) B.N.S., the Allahabad High Court considered the applicant's plea for bail in a murder case. The Court held that the case for bail is made out and allowed the prayer subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till filing of police report subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties and adherence to specified conditions.

Ramkishor vs State of U.P. and Another — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8628 of 2025

¶3

Ramkishor

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shitlesh Pandey, Shivendra Nath Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 71

¶7

HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 531 of 2025 under Sections 103(1), 3(5) B.N.S., Police StationKotwali Khalilabad, District- Sant Kabir Nagar during the pendency of the trial before the learned court below.

¶10

It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that murder of the deceased, Hanuman was committed on 20.06.2025 at about 08:30 pm and the on the basis of suspicion, the name of Amit, Ramkishor, Mustakim, Mohd. Jamshed was implicated in the First Information Report. After lodging of the FIR, the investigation started. During investigation, one of the accused-persons Amit came into light and the basis of his confessional statement, three other accused persons were also implicated. Amit was arrested by the Police. It is further submitted that from the confessional statement of the accused-persons, the fact came into light that main accused was Mohd. Jamshed, who pushed the deceased with intention to kill him due to which, the deceased fell down and sustained severe fatal injuries and died.

¶11

It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the main accused, Mohd. Jamshed was granted anticipatory bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.08.2025 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 7050 of 2025. It is also submitted that no specific role in the incident was assigned to the present accused-applicant. It

¶12

NABAIL No. 8628 of 2025

¶13

¶14

is further submitted that applicant has no criminal history to his credit. 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 and in case he is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶15

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that during investigation so far, ample evidence has been collected by the Investigating Officer of this case, but he could not dispute this fact that the name of the present accused-applicant came into light only on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused.

¶16

I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

¶17

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, antecedents of the accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate the entire available material against the accused carefully and the exact role of accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶18

In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶19

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶20

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Ramkishor involved in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till filing of police report 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, with the following conditions :-

¶21

(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;

¶22

NABAIL No. 8628 of 2025

¶23

¶24

(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;

¶25

(iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

November 3, 2025 Anjali

¶29

(Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.)

¶30

Digitally signed by :- ANJALI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramkishor v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramkishor v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sheru vs State of U.P. and Another

Lakhan Sankhwar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ankush Mangal vs State of U.P. and Another

Kusum Pal @ Kushal Pal vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Afasana vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharmveer Alias Dhurmu vs State of U.P.