RAVI KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. A.C.S./PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER
BAIL/8099/2025 · 2025-09-01
Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 160621 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 160621 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8099 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.
1. Heard Sri Yogesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mayank Sinha, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 304 of 2025, under Sections 303(2), 317(2) B.N.S., registered at Police Station Rauanhi, District Ayodhya. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 17.07.2025 stating that the informant had food at an eatery and Rs.83,000/- were stolen from his bag from there. The F.I.R. was lodged against an unknown person and during investigation the applicant has been implicated in the present case as the applicant was working at the said eatery and it is claimed that the money has been recovered from the applicant. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. 5. The learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the prayer for bail and he has submitted that the investigation of the case is still going on. However, he admitted that no independent person has witnessed the alleged recovery. 6. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shraddha Chaturvedi, Dharmendra Kumar Yadav, Yogesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A. Ravi Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. A.C.S./Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)
case and keeping in view the fact that the alleged recovery has not been witnessed by any independent person; that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 18.07.2025 the offence carries a maximum punishment of imprisonment up to three years and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime. 7. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 8.
Let the applicant-Ravi Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court. September 1, 2025 Ram. BAIL No. 8099 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench