SANDEEP SAXENA ALIAS NEUTAN v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
BAIL/13537/2025 · 2025-04-30
Mayur Jain Jt Registrar J Listing
Transfer Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 40261 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 40261 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:69134 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13537 of 2025 Applicant :- Sandeep Saxena Alias Neutan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in S.S.T. No. 498 of 2024, under Sections 392/34, 394/34, 323/34, 504/34, 506/34, 427/34 I.P.C., arising out of Complaint Case No. 515 of 2023 (Rohit Kumar vs. Buddhdev @ Lalu and Others), Police Station- Amritpur, District- Farrukhabad, during pendency of the trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Instant complaint has been lodged with malicious intention in counterblast as earlier applicant's side lodged first informant report being Case Crime No. 0037 of 2023 against the complainant's side. Applicant has criminal history of two cases, which has been explained in para 4 of the supplementary affidavit. Applicant is languishing in jail since 18.03.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and co-operate in trial.
5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the facts argued by learned counsel for the applicant.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case,
submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of
the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
7. Let the applicant- Sandeep Saxena @ Neutan who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 1.5.2025 Pratima (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRATIMA AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad