Hariom Vs State of U.P.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4710 of 2026

Hariom

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Abhishek Ankur Chaurasia, Ashutosh Tripathi, Diwan Saifullah Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A., Jai Prakash Singh, Richard Kumar

¶7

Court No. - 67

¶8

HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.

¶9

Heard Sri Ashutosh Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jai Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Bhupendra Pal Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶10

The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.311 of 2024, under Sections103(1), 109, 115(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 351(3), 352, BNS, Police Station- Soron, District-Kasganj, during the pendency of the trial.

¶11

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that in the FIR as well as in the statement of first informant, allegation has been made that the applicant along with other co-accused persons run over the tractor over the deceased Maan Pal and Amar Singh and other injured person. Before his death, deceased Amar Singh has stated in his statement that the present applicant ran over his tractor over the son of Maan Pal and other tractor has also hit him. It is further submitted that there are contradictory statements that some of them have specified the role of the applicant, some of them have stated that it is Hari Om who has run over the tractor over the son of the Maan Pal. It is lastly submitted that 36 witnesses are proposed to be examined but till date only 3 witnesses have been examined, therefore, trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. It is further submitted that the applicant has explained the criminal history of five cases in the accompanying affidavit. It is further submitted that charge sheet has been filed in the present case, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation. The applicant is a law abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 03.08.2024. In case, he is

¶12

BAIL No. 4710 of 2026

¶13

2

¶14

granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶15

Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶16

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and taking into account overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial courts as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 as well as guideline of this Court in the case of Maya Tiwari Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2024 SCC Online All 6765 regarding grant of bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶17

Let the applicant- Hariom, involved in the aforementioned crime 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:-

¶18

i. 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.

¶19

ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶20

iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶21

iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed by him.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶23

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶24

BAIL No. 4710 of 2026

¶25

3

¶26

Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant as well as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.

¶27

It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.

¶28

It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure early release of the applicant.

¶29

Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through Kasganj Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal within 24 hours in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685.

¶30

May 5, 2026 S.C.

¶31

(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)

¶32

Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM CHAURASIA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hariom v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hariom 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

Similar cases

Vaibhav Garg and Another vs State of Up and Another

Mahesh Paswan Alias Rinku Paswan and Others vs State of Up and Another

Vaibhav Garg and Another vs State of Up and Another

Boby Vs State of U.P.

Zakir Vs State of U.P.

Aneeta Yadav Vs State of U.P.