PEETAM AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO.
BAIL/5514/2025 · 2025-06-19
Rajeev Singh
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 147137 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 147137 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35876 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5514 of 2025 Applicant :- Peetam And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.361 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 109 and 61(2)A B.N.S., Police Station Bilgram, District Hardoi. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants is an innocent person and he is in jail since 24.12.2024. He further submits that co-accused - Dhiru @ Dhirendra & Dariyal, Rajeev, Bhanu and Satyendra, having identical role, have already been granted bail by this Court, vide order dated 20.05.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.13227 of 2024, order dated 10.03.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.9108 of 2024, order dated 09.05.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2541 of 2025 and order dated 10.03.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.8964 pf 2024. In these circumstances, the applicants are also entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of the applicants for grant of bail, but he conceded the fact that co-accused - Dhiru @ Dhirendra & Dariyal, Rajeev, Bhanu and Satyendra have already been granted bail by this Court. 5. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, contents of the F.I.R., other relevant documents, bail order of the co-accused - Dhiru @ Dhirendra & Dariyal, Rajeev, Bhanu and Satyendra, ground of parity as well as totality of fact and circumstances, I am of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail. 6.
Let applicants - Peetam and Ankit @ Kariya be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicants shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (ii) The applicants 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. (iii) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iv) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 269 BNS. (v) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 BNSS, may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 BNS. (vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 19.6.2025 J. K. Dinkar Digitally signed by :- JESHU KUMAR DINKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench