TARACHAND v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. HOME LKO.
BAIL/11536/2025 · 2025-12-05
Karunesh Singh Pawar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 187043 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 187043 (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. - 11536 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. It is alleged that during the night of 13/14.06.2025, while the complainant and his family were sleeping outside their house, the complainant’s sister awoke around 3:30 a.m. and reported that a theft had occurred inside the house. According to the prosecution, an unidentified person stole a substantial quantity of jewellery along with Rs. 10,000/- in cash. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated solely due to his criminal history. It is further argued that there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery, the recovered items have not been connected with the offence, and no test identification parade was conducted. The charge sheet has already been filed. The applicant has also clarified his involvement in 12 criminal cases in paragraph 11 of the bail application and has been in custody since 18.07.2025. 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. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. Considering that the applicant is in jail since 18.07.2025, has explained his criminal antecedents, and the alleged offence is triable by a Magistrate, this Court finds it a fit case for granting bail to the applicant. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vayu Nandan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Tarachand .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s)
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Tarachand, involved in FIR No.69/2025, U/s-305(a), 317(2), 331(4) Β.N.S. Police Station- Sriduttganj, District - Balrampur be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court.
Any other condition(s) which the trial court/concerned court may deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case, may also be imposed. 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 5, 2025 R.C.
BAIL No. 11536 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench