Suresh Kumar Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko.

This is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No.10/2021, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow.

¶12

The first bail application was rejected by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide detailed order dated 5.10.2023 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.1784 of 2022.

¶13

While dismissing the first bail application of the applicant, the Coordinate Bench of this Court has observed as under ( paragraph 27 ) :-

¶14

"27. However, considering the facts that the trial of the case is stated to have been commenced and the case has been fixed by the trial court for framing of charges, this Court hope and trust that the trial court shall make an earnest endeavour to expedite the trial and conclude it, expeditiously, if possible, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order."

¶15

As per office report dated 5.4.2026, compliance report dated 4.4.2026 sent by the learned C.J.M., Lucknow has been sent, according to which, chargesheet has been submitted on 16.7.2021 and on 14.5.2025, charges have been framed and the witnesses have been summoned.

¶16

BAIL No. 12349 of 2024

¶17

2

¶18

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 8.1.2021. The charges have been framed and the case is fixed for summoning the witnesses. The trial will take time to be concluded. The applicant has criminal history of 12 cases including the present one, out of which in ten cases, the applicant has been granted bail. The averments to the said effect, have been duly explained in paragraphs nos.37 and 39 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. 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 misuse the liberty of bail. Hence, the applicant may be granted bail.

¶19

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail by mentioning that the applicant has criminal history of several cases and his first bail application was rejected.

¶20

On due consideration to the facts that the applicant is in judicial custody since 8.1.2021; the charges have been framed and the trial will take time to be concluded ; the applicant has criminal history which has been duly explained in paragraphs 37 and 39 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, without entering into the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, the second bail application is allowed.

¶22

Let the applicant- Suresh Kumar Verma involved in Case Crime No.10 of 2021 (supra) be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶23

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶24

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶25

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court, either personally or through his counsel.

¶26

Any other condition(s) which the trial court/concerned court may deem fit

¶27

BAIL No. 12349 of 2024

¶28

3

¶29

and proper, in the circumstances of the case, may also be imposed.

¶30

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.

¶31

(Rajeev Bharti,J.)

¶32

April 6, 2026

¶33

Shukla

¶34

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Suresh Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. 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

Vikas vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Rishu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Indra Prakash Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Home Lucknow

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

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

Saleem vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko