Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 56047 (ALL)

RAMCHANDRA AND 3 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

BAIL/15905/2025 · 2025-08-04

Gautam Chowdhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:132847 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15905 of 2025 Applicant :- Ramchandra And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Bhan Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that on 14.12.2016 a complaint was filed by the wife of son of the applicant No. 1-Ramchandra alleging therein that all the accused stopped her when she was going to sell milk and assaulted her and the accused Akhilesh caused knife injury on her hand and also snatched her gold ornaments, mobile phone and Rs. 450/-. Learned counsel further submits that there is no injury report of the complainant on the record to support the prosecution case as alleged. After lodging of complaint the statements under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. were recorded and applicants have been summoned under Section 395, 397 I.P.C. and vide order dated 19.04.2025 the bail applications of applicants has been rejected by the court concerned. Learned counsel further submits that the present proceeding has been initiated due to matrimonial dispute arose between the parties. The complaint is the wife of son of the applicant No. 1 and earlier she has initiated a proceeding under Section 496 I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act against her in- laws including maintenance suit. Learned counsel further submits that there is no eye witness of the alleged incident and the present proceeding has initiated with malafide intention. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicants have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicants that they are ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make themselves available before the court whenever required and are also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon them. He next submits that the applicants are in jail since 19.04.2025. 3. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicants by contending that the innocence of the applicants cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, they do not deserve any indulgence. 4. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed. 5. Let the applicant-Ramchandra, Vijay Pal, Pawan Kumar and Shyampal, be enlarged on bail in Special Session Trial No. 1931 of 2018 (Complainty Case No. 535 of 2016), under Sections 395, 397 I.P.C., Police Station- Civil Lines, District- Budaun, on executing a personal bond each and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: i) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicants shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicants shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. iv) The applicants shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission. v) The applicants 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 6. In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicants in accordance with law. Order Date :- 5.8.2025 Manoj Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad