Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 80906 (ALL)

RAVINDRA URF RAMU v. STATE OF U.P.

BAIL/27831/2025 · 2025-08-12

Gautam Chowdhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:138242 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27831 of 2025 Applicant :- Ravindra Urf Ramu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the instant case, initially the applicant was granted bail in the year 2006. He was appearing before the trial court till 09.09.2009, thereafter, the applicant was arrested in another case and has been sent to jail, due to which he failed to appear before the court concerned and despite B. warrant jail authorities have not sent him to the court concerned and was in jail till 15.06.2020. Thereafter the applicant remained ill and was under treatment since 2021 and due to this reason he failed to appear. The applicant is in jail since 01.07.2025. He further submits that the applicant had not deliberately absconded from the judicial proceedings and undertakes that he shall not repeat the same in future and in case, applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 3. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. 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-Ravindra Urf Ramu, be enlarged on bail in S.S.T. No. 81A of 2006, under Sections 394, 411 I.P.C., arising out of Case Crime No. 34 of 2006, under Section 394 I.P.C., Police Station- Ujhani, District- Budaun, on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission. v) The applicant 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 informant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court. Order Date :- 13.8.2025 Mustaqeem. Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad