Jayram vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12611 of 2026

Jayram

	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Amar Nath Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 68

¶6

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State-Respondent and perused the record.

¶8

This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 98 of 2026, under Sections 281, 125A, 125B, 109, 117(2), 191(2), 191(3), 352, 324(4) of the B.N.S., Police Station Gulriha, District Gorakhpur.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case crime number. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the FIR has been registered against four unknown persons. He submits that in the FIR only general allegation has been levelled against the unknown accused persons. He submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR and his name surfaced during the course of investigation in the statement of co-accused. He submits that no incriminating material has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. He submits that there is no independent witness of the alleged incident. He submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed on 30.03.2026, as such the applicant is not required for any custodial interrogation. In the medical report, injury has been shown upon the head of the victim, which was caused due to accident. He submits that the informant and his brother were in drunken condition and they met with an accident and therefore they received head injury. He submits that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant in the present case. The applicant is

¶10

BAIL No. 12611 of 2026

¶11

2

¶12

languishing in jail since 10.02.2026. He submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedent to his credit. He submits that there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, the bail has been prayed for.

¶13

Learned counsel for the AGA has vehemently opposed, but could not dispute the aforesaid fact raised by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶14

Considering all those facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and primafacie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out.

¶15

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶16

Let the accused-applicant, Jayram , involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶17

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶18

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶19

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶20

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶21

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶22

May 6, 2026

¶23

pks

¶24

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶25

Digitally signed by :- PAWAN KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jayram v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayram 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pawan Verma Vs State of U.P.

Abdul Rahman @ Jasim Vs State of U.P.

Mange Vs State of U.P.

Vimal Kumar Savita vs State of U.P.

Mahaveer Sharan Pahadiya vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Mohsin vs State of U.P.