Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 188915 (ALL)

JITENDRA SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO

/988/2025 · 2025-12-09

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. - 988 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State; Shri Abhishek Singh, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record. 3. This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant who seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.281 of 2023, under Section 302, 394, 411, 506 IPC, P.S. Ghazipur, District Lucknow. First bail application was rejected on 09.09.2024 and directions were also given that formal witnesses should be examined without giving any unnecessary adjournment. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant while arguing the present second bail application argues that all the witnesses have been examined and the case is at the final stage. He draws my attention to the statement of the witnesses wherein a third person, who is allegedly the applicant and had his head and face covered, could not be identified substantially. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. 5. Learned counsel for the informant opposes the bail application by arguing that the third person namely the applicant, had the motive to commit the offence also and considering the testimony and the manner in Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Hemant Kumar Pandey, Osama Syed, Riyaz Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Abhishek Singh, Gajendra Pratap Singh Jitendra Singh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko .....Opposite Party(s) which the offence was committed, the bail application deserves to be rejected. He, however, does not deny that the witnesses have already been examined. 6. Considering the fact that all the witnesses have been examined and in terms of the testimony the applicant has not been categorically identified from the CCTV footage coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, can adversely affect the trial, the applicant who is in custody since 07.07.2023 is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed. 7. Let the applicant Jitendra Singh be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of the like amount 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. December 9, 2025 nishant BAIL No. 988 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench