Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 23011 (ALL)

RAJBAL v. STATE OF U.P.

BAIL/7427/2025 · 2025-03-03

Vivek Varma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:31116 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7427 of 2025 Applicant :- Rajbal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amarnath Tripathi,Vikas Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State-respondent and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 25 of 2024, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Janakpuri, District Saharanpur, during the pendency of trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant stood surety for the accused person on the basis of genuine documents. The applicant has not forged and manufactured any documents.The applicant is not the beneficiary in the alleged transaction. The applicant is in jail since 8.12.2024 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned AGA and the counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds at this stage there is no substantive evidence against the applicant. The applicant has remained confined for more than two months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant Rajbal, involved in the aforesaid case 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 subject to the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 SFH Digitally signed by :- SYED FAHIM HUSAIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad