Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 179629 (ALL)

JAGDISH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME LKO

BAIL/6384/2025 · 2025-10-29

Karunesh Singh Pawar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6384 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.31 of 2025 under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 351(2) BNS, Police Station Sushant Golf City, District Lucknow. Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that some unknown persons have executed a sale deed in respect of the land belonging to the informant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the alleged offence is triable by a Magistrate. It is contended that the applicant is not a beneficiary and has not received any amount towards the consideration in the execution of the sale deed. A suit for cancellation of the said sale deed has also been instituted and is presently pending before the Court of Civil Judge (Hawali), Lucknow. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and charge- sheet in the present case has already been filed. It is also submitted that there is no likelihood of the applicant fleeing from justice or tampering with the prosecution witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he undertakes not to misuse the liberty of bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Harsh Vardhan Shahi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Jagdish .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko .....Opposite Party(s) Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the facts mentioned above. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. On due consideration to the facts that the Civil Suit No.2343 of 2024 is pending before the competent court; offence is triable by Magistrate; the applicant has no criminal antecedents; the applicant is in jail since 15.4.2025 and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Jagdish be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) 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. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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. (v) 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 229-A of the IPC (now Section 269 BNS). (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order BAIL No. 6384 of 2025 2 to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS)is issued and the 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 174-A of the IPC (now Section 209 BNS). It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. October 29, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 6384 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench