Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 192248 (ALL)

SHREEDHAR PRASAD v. STATE OF U.P.

BAIL/33829/2025 · 2025-10-06

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33829 of 2025 Court No. - 68 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Purshottam Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents and perused the record. This bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Shreedhar Prasad, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 546 of 2017, under sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. and 3/4 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act 1978, Police Station-Vrindavan, District-mathura. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 07.04.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was named in the First Information Report. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that similarly circumstanced co-accused Anubhav Mittal, has already been enlarged on bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 30144 of 2025 vide order dated 18th September 2025. Criminal history of 12 cases has been properly explained in paragraph no. 17 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant, but submits that similarly circumstanced aforesaid co-accused has already been granted bail by this Court. Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dileep Kumar Yadav, Virendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shreedhar Prasad .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) case for bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the accused-applicant, Shreedhar Prasad, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence. 2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity. 3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial. 4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. October 7, 2025 Deepak/ BAIL No. 33829 of 2025 2 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- DEEPAK KUMAR KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad