RAJEEV KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. HOME LKO.
/10669/2025 · 2025-11-19
Pankaj Bhatia
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 180466 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 180466 (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. - 10669 of 2025
Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record. 2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.571 of 2025, under Section 3(5), 127(3), 108 BNS, P.S. Shahabad, District Hardoi. 3. In terms of the FIR it was alleged that a police vehicle had taken the son of the informant aged about 20 years to the Kotwali on the allegation that he has enticed a girl and when the informant reached the police station, he was informed that legal course shall follow. It was stated that thereafter for five days the son was kept in police custody and when on 31.08.2025 at about 6:30 PM the informant came back after giving food to the son, information was received that the son was unwell and when the informant went there, it was informed that he has committed suicide. On the basis of the said, allegations were levelled that the entire personnel of the said police station had got the offence committed. The applicant is the Home Guard in the said police station and is being sought to be prosecuted under Section 108 BNS. 4. In the light of the said allegation, this Court had called for the postmortem report which indicates presence of ligature mark and no other injury was observed on the body of the deceased. 5. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application. 6. Considering the postmortem report and there being nothing on record to Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Devashish Bhatt Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rajeev Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s)
suggest abetment at the instance of the applicant, as such, considering the law as explained in the case of Mariano Anto Bruno and Anr. v. Inspector of Police; 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1387, the applicant who is in custody since 15.09.2025 is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed. 7.
Let the applicant Rajeev Kumar be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions: (a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings; (b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and (c) 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. November 19, 2025 nishant BAIL No. 10669 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench