Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 180697 (ALL)

SHANKAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO.

BAIL/6432/2025 · 2025-11-17

Pankaj Bhatia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6432 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. 100 of 2025, under sections 103(1), 3(5) BNS, P.S. Kotwali Nanpara, District Bahraich. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that in terms of FIR lodged on 11.3.2025 it was alleged that husband of informant had old enmity with three accused persons and they killed him with use of bricks and sharp weapons and body of the deceased was lying alongside the motorcycle. In the light of the said allegations learned counsel for the applicant states that none of the panch witnesses were made. He further argues that subsequently on the basis of statement recorded on 29.3.2025 eye witness deposed that he had seen the applicant committing the offence in question. Based upon the said statement of the eye witness the applicant was linked with the offence in question. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that none of the eye witness were made prosecution witness and testimony of alleged eye witness is after a substantial delay without there being any explanation. No confessional statement or recovery was affected to the applicant. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application. 5. Considering the nature of allegations and materials to link the applicant Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sajeet Singh, Roshan Lal Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ateeq Ahmad Ansari, Zia Ur Rehman Shankar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) with offence in question being after substantial delay without any explanation and there being no recovery or motive being shown at the applicant coupled with the fact that the statement of other witness have not recognize any of three persons, however, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the applicant who is in jail since 19.5.2025 and has no criminal history is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed. 6. Let the applicant Shankar 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 17, 2025 J. K. Dinkar BAIL No. 6432 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- JESHU KUMAR DINKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench