Pappu vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11208 of 2025

Pappu

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Digvijay Singh Yadav, Shikha Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 15

¶8

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶9

Present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.- 393 of 2025, U/S-3/5/8 of Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station- Bhadokhar, District- Raebareli.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the name of the applicant has surfaced only in the confessional statements of the coaccused persons and the applicant is not named in the FIR. It is further submitted that there is no eyewitness to the alleged incident and the applicant was not arrested from the spot. It is also submitted that the alleged slaughtered animal is not of cow progeny.

¶12

Learned counsel further submits that the co-accused, Majjan, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 19.11.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11257 of 2025. The applicant claims parity with the bail order of the co-accused Majjan. It is also submitted that the applicant has explained his criminal history of three cases in the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is languishing in jail since 19.09.2025.

¶13

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not

¶14

BAIL No. 11208 of 2025

¶15

2

¶16

misuse the liberty of bail.

¶17

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶18

Considering the facts that the charge sheet has been filed, the offence is triable by a Magistrate, the applicant's name has surfaced only in the confessional statements of the co-accused, the coaccused named above has been granted bail, and he is in custody since 19.09.2025, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail to the applicant.

¶19

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶20

Let the applicant Pappu involved in Case Crime No. 393 of 2025, U/S-3/5/8 of Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police StationBhadokhar, District- Raebareli, 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶21

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

¶22

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶23

(iii) 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.

¶24

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶25

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶26

BAIL No. 11208 of 2025

¶27

3

¶28

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 of BNS).

¶29

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial.

¶30

January 28, 2026 Madhu D.R/P.S

¶31

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶32

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Pappu v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shailendra Nath Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Medical Health and Family Welfare U.P., Lko. and 2 Others

Shailendra Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Secondary Education and 5 Others

Balram Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Ram Gopal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Ramzan and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ravi Kant vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Forest Deptt. Lko. and Another