Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 147066 (ALL)

RAMU v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND ANOTHER

ABAIL/752/2025 · 2025-07-07

Karunesh Singh Pawar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:38107 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 752 of 2025 Applicant :- Ramu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Kanaujia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. apprehending his arrest in Range Case:- 06/2003-04, under Sections 09/27/35(6)/51(1) of Wild Life Protection Act, Range Belrayan District Lakhimpur Kheri. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a recovery of prohibited species of fish, tortoises, etc., was made from the possession of the co-accused who were apprehended at the spot. It is further submitted that the applicant was not arrested from the spot of the incident. He has no prior criminal record and has been falsely implicated. His name has surfaced in the confessional statement of the co-accused, and there is no independent witness to the incident. The applicant has been wrongly accused. It is also submitted that the applicant has cooperated during the course of investigation and undertakes to cooperate in the trial. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the anticipatory bail application. On due consideration to the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, his name has surfaced only in the confessional statement of the co-accused, and taking into account the undertaking given on his behalf to cooperate with the trial, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant deserves to be granted anticipatory bail, in light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, subject to his continued cooperation in the trial proceedings. In view of the above, the accused-applicant is directed to surrender before the trial court within a period of twenty days from today. Upon his surrender, the trial court shall release him on anticipatory bail, subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the same amount, to the satisfaction of the trial court, with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall refrain from directly or indirectly inducing, threatening, or promising any person familiar with the facts of the case in a manner that may dissuade them from revealing such facts before the Court or result in tampering with the evidence; (ii) The applicant shall not travel outside India without prior permission from the Court; (iii) The applicant shall not attempt to influence or intimidate any prosecution witness; (iv) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on all scheduled dates unless specifically exempted from personal appearance; (v) In the event of any violation of the aforementioned conditions, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant; Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed. It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed. Order Date :- 7.7.2025/R.C. Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench