SHAILENDRA RAWAT v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO.
/11848/2025 · 2025-12-02
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 182958 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 182958 (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. - 11848 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on the basis of one recovery, five cases have been registered against the applicant. Applicant has explained the criminal history of five cases in the supplementary affidavit. It is submitted that from the applicant Rs.110/- in cash has been shown to be recovered, however, on the joint pointing of all the accused, nine batteries of E-rickshaw are shown. Co-accused Kamal Kutil has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 13.11.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.10763 of 2025. There is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. 4. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sumit Chauhan, Ashutosh Srivastava, Meenakshi Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shailendra Rawat .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s)
considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the fact that there is no independent witness to the said recovery; the fact that chargesheet has been filed;applicant has explained the criminal history of five cases; bail order of co-accused and the applicant is in jail since 03.08.2025 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8.
Let the applicant Shailendra Rawat involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 559 of 2025, Under Sections- 303(2), 317(2), 317(4) B.N.S/379, 411, 413 IPC., Police Station- Para, District- Lucknow, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (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 in accordance with law. (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now BAIL No. 11848 of 2025 2
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 IPC (now Section 209 of BNS). 9. 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. December 2, 2025 Renu/- BAIL No. 11848 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RENU AGARWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench