PRAHLAD v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO
CRLA/1840/2025 · 2025-06-24
Subhash Chandra Sharma
Criminal Appealbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 146538 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 146538 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36208 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1840 of 2025 Appellant :- Prahlad Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Appellant :- Shesh Nath Tiwari,Vijay Shankar Padey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.
2. The instant criminal appeal under Section 14A(2) of S.C./ S.T. Act has been filed with the prayer to set aside the impugned order dated 29.05.2025 passed by the learned trial court in Computer Registration No.919 of 2015 titled Prahlad vs. State of U.P., arising out of Case Crime No.178 of 1993, under Sections 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Jalalpur, District Ambedkar Nagar, whereby the bail application filed by appellant was rejected.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that in this case, due to miscommunication between the counsel and the appellant, the appellant did not appear before the learned trial court, which led to the issuance of a non-bailable warrant against him, and notices to
the sureties were also issued. When this fact came to his knowledge, he surrendered before the learned trial court and has been in jail since
19.05.2025. The appellant never intended to misuse the liberty of bail; it was only due to the assurance of the learned counsel that his attendance was not required before the learned trial court.
4. His further submission is that the appellant is ready to face the trial and will appear before the learned trial court on every date. Therefore, a request is made to release him on bail. The
learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the learned trial court did not consider this fact and rejected the bail application vide order dated 29.05.2025, which is liable to be set aside as being erroneous.
5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid.
6. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully.
7. On considering the submissions made by the
learned counsel for the appellant and the learned A.G.A., perusal of the record and the order passed by the learned trial court, it is evident that the appellant could not appear before the learned trial court due to miscommunication from his counsel, and he is now ready to face the trial and to appear
before the court on every date. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. The impugned order dated 29.05.2025 suffers from infirmity and illegality, and the same is liable to be set aside, and the appeal is to be allowed.
8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.
9. Let the appellant- Prahlad involved in Case Crime No.178 of 1993, under Sections 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Jalalpur, District Ambedkar Nagar be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is
suspected. (iv) The appellant 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.
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. [Subhash Chandra Sharma, J.]
Order Date :- 24.6.2025 cks/- Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA KANT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench