SANTOSH KUMAR (IN FIR SANTOSH RAWAT) v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER
/1930/2025 · 2025-12-09
Karunesh Singh Pawar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 188916 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 188916 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1930 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1.The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.173 of 2024 under sections 55, 61(2) BNS, P.S. Rahimabad, district Lucknow West (Commissionerate Lucknow). 2.Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 3.It is alleged in the prosecution case that while the police party was busy in checking on 17.9.2024 at Rahimabad Chauraha, on the basis of a information received from secret informer, they have apprehended two persons riding on a black splender motorcycle. From them, 315 bore countrymade pistol, five live cartridges and Rs.50,000/- cash have been recovered. The co-accused Vijai Pal Rawat and Nagendra Rawat in their statement in police custody have alleged that the applicant has given Rs.50,000/- advance in order to commit murder of Shishupal. 4.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that except the confessional statement of co-accused and recovery, there is no other material against the applicant. Shishupal is real cousin brother of the applicant. Vijai Pal Rawat and Nagendra Rawat are also relative of the applicant. A civil suit No.624 of 2025 Smt. Champakali versus Smt. Chameli and others is pending adjudication before the competent civil court.. In that suit, family of Shishupal and the applicant are parties. During pendency of the suit, Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vaibhav Sharma, Aakash Rai, Anand Kumar Sharma, Ravi Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Santosh Kumar (In Fir Santosh Rawat) .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)
mother of the applicant Champakali has also filed a suit for partition under section 116 of U.P. Revenue Code. During pendency of civil suit No.624 of 2025, an attempt has been made by Shishupal to raise his construction over the entire property and as such, the mother of the applicant filed an IGRS complaint contained in Annexure No.5 to the bail application. It is submitted that charge sheet has been filed against the applicant. During investigation, the applicant has cooperated. His statement has been recorded. After filing of the charge sheet, no useful purpose would be served in sending the applicant behind bar. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial. 5. Learned Addl.
Government Advocate has opposed the prayer made by applicant's counsel. It is submitted that the statement of the two co- accused in police custody cannot be disbelieved as it is linked with the recovery of Rs.50,000/- and country-made pistol etc. 6.Considering the above aspects of the matter, perusal of the record, the applicant was not arrested during investigation, the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial, the applicant has no criminal history, civil suit is pending between the parties, judgment of Supreme Court in Musheer Alam versus The State of U.P. and another 2025 SCC OnLine SC 116 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant protection to the applicant. 7. In view of the above, it is provided that the applicant shall surrender before the concerned court within 10 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. On such surrender, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial and he will not influence the witnesses.The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. Any other condition which the trial court may deem fit and proper may also be imposed. NABAIL No. 1930 of 2025 2
8. In case of default, it would be open for the trial court to proceed in accordance with law. 9. The application is allowed accordingly. December 9, 2025 kkb/ NABAIL No. 1930 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench