Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 180899 (ALL)

SATENDRA @ GOLU v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. HOME U.P. LKO.

BAIL/7300/2025 · 2025-11-25

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. - 7300 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 accused-applicant seeks bail in FIR/Case Crime No.515 of 2025 under sections 3(5), 103(1), 238(A) BNS, P.S. Kotwali Sadar, District Kheri. 3. In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the cousin brother of the informant, who used to roam about on a tricycle, went missing on 10.06.2025 for which a missing person report was lodged on 11.06.2025. Subsequently, on the basis of the confessional statement of the applicant, the FIR was lodged alleging that they have committed the murder of the missing person. The said FIR was lodged on 23.06.2025 at about 07:04 pm. 4. The counsel for the applicant draws my attention to the arrest memo of the applicant who was arrested on 23.06.2025 at about 3:30 pm which also bears the FIR No.515 of 2025, which was subsequently registered at about 07:04 pm. Apart from the same, the counsel for the applicant argues that the applicant was linked with the offence based upon the confessional statement, which has no evidentiary value. 5. The counsel for the informant, while opposing the bail application, Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rudra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Lalji Prasad Shukla, Ram Asarey Verma Satendra @ Golu .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) argues that the applicant had the motive to commit the offence as the person who is the uncle had executed a will in favour of the informant. It is further argued that after the commission of the offence, objections have been filed in the mutation proceedings which were filed, based upon the will executed. 6. Considering the submissions made at the bar, prima-facie, there is no explanation to the mention of FIR no.515 of 2025 in the arrest memo done on 23.06.2025 at about 3:30 pm whereas the FIR was lodged on 23.06.2025 at about 7.00 pm. Thus, looking these materials as well as the fact that the applicant has been linked based upon the confessional statement, the applicant who has no criminal history and is in custody since 23.06.2025 is entitled for the bail. 7. In view thereof, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Satendra @ Golu be released on bail in aforesaid FIR/Case Crime Number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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 25, 2025 VNP/- BAIL No. 7300 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench