Pramod Kumar Bhartiya v. State of U.P

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34661 of 2025 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.

¶1Heard Sri Yogesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Rafika Anees Khan, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Rakesh Kumar Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶2Instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.124 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 109(1) BNS, Police Station-Sarai Mamrej, District-Prayagraj.

¶3Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that he was not named in the FIR and subsequently on the statement of injured, the allegation was made against the applicant for exhortation to other co-accused persons. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant for causing injury to the injured. It is further submitted that charge sheet has been filed by the police, therefore there is no requirement for custodial interrogation. The applicant has criminal history of five cases which are petty in nature and he is in jail since 08.08.2025. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶4On the other hand, learned counsel for the first informant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that in the CCTV footage specific role for exaggerating has been assigned to the applicant and he has criminal history of five case, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sunil Kumar Yadav, Yogesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pramod Kumar Bhartiya .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)

¶5Thus, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and taking into the account that there is no specific role for causing injuries to the injured and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶6Let the applicant-Pramod Kumar Bhartiya involved in the aforementioned crime 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, with the following conditions:- i. 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without seeking any adjournment. iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed by him.

¶7In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶8Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. October 8, 2025 A.Kr. BAIL No. 34661 of 2025 (Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad