Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 235 (ALL)

Hansraj v. State of U. P.

2025-02-06

SAMEER JAIN

body2025
JUDGMENT : Sameer Jain, J. 1. Heard Sri Ram Sagar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant appointed by High Court Legal Services and Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned brief holder for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 338 of 2001, under Section 302 IPC , Police Station-Bilsi, District-Budaun, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that earlier applicant was released on bail in the present matter on 16.01.2002 but after released on bail, he was detained in Delhi in connection to some other case, therefore, he could not attend the trial court and in the meantime, coercive measures were taken against him and thereafter he was produced before the court concerned on 04.05.2023 on Warrant-B and since then he is in jail in the present case. 4. He further submitted that as applicant was detained in connection to some other matter, therefore, it cannot be said that he is an absconder. 5. He further submitted that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 04.05.2023 i.e. for last more than one and half years, therefore, considering the long incarceration of the applicant and the fact that in the present matter, earlier he has already been released on bail, he should be released on bail. 6. Per contra, learned AGA however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 8. From the record, it reflects that applicant after released on bail failed to appear before the court concerned but it also reflect that he was detained in Delhi in connection to some other case and he was produced before the court concerned on Warrant-B on 04.05.2023 and considering this fact, it cannot be said that applicant is an absconder. 9. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 04.05.2023 i.e. for last more than one and half years. 10. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 11. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 10. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 11. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant- Hansraj be released on bail in the aforesaid case on 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 appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 13. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 14. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.