Ravi Kant Pal v. The State of Uttar Pradesh). He further
Case Details
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further submits that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant in the instant matter. He further submits that role of applicant and other co-accused persons are same. Applicant is only the employee in the R.B.N. Infrastructure, which is registered company. Applicant has not misappropriated any amount. He further submits that a concocted and false story has been set up by the prosecution whereas the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. There is no independent witness of the recovery so made by the police authority. He further submits that co-accused Ravi Kant Pal having similar role has already been enlarged on bail by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated
22.02.2021 passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 1610 of 2020 (Ravi Kant Pal vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh). He further 2 BAIL No. 6205 of 2025 submits that only one criminal case has been registered against the applicant which has been duly explained in para no. 18 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, the same is related to section 174-A I.P.C.. He further submits that trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. Applicant languishing in jail since 13.09.2024.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. He further contended that no specific and separate liability of accused applicant is available on record, but the liability of the accused applicant and other co-accused persons are shown the case diary having amount of approximately Rs. 3,25,00,000/-. He further contended that charge- sheet has already been filed in this matter and charges have already been framed by the trial court. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
5. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, bail application is allowed.
6. Considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above 3 BAIL No. 6205 of 2025 their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A I.P.C./269 B.N.S. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 B.N.S.S. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A I.P.C./209. B.N.S. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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.
7. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 4 BAIL No. 6205 of 2025
8. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. October 28, 2025 Bhanu (Santosh Rai,J.)
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further submits that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant in the instant matter. He further submits that role of applicant and other co-accused persons are same. Applicant is only the employee in the R.B.N. Infrastructure, which is registered company. Applicant has not misappropriated any amount. He further submits that a concocted and false story has been set up by the prosecution whereas the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. There is no independent witness of the recovery so made by the police authority. He further submits that co-accused Ravi Kant Pal having similar role has already been enlarged on bail by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated
22.02.2021 passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 1610 of 2020 (Ravi Kant Pal vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh). He further 2 BAIL No. 6205 of 2025 submits that only one criminal case has been registered against the applicant which has been duly explained in para no. 18 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, the same is related to section 174-A I.P.C.. He further submits that trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. Applicant languishing in jail since 13.09.2024.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. He further contended that no specific and separate liability of accused applicant is available on record, but the liability of the accused applicant and other co-accused persons are shown the case diary having amount of approximately Rs. 3,25,00,000/-. He further contended that charge- sheet has already been filed in this matter and charges have already been framed by the trial court. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
5. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, bail application is allowed.
6. Considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above 3 BAIL No. 6205 of 2025 their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A I.P.C./269 B.N.S. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 B.N.S.S. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A I.P.C./209. B.N.S. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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.
7. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 4 BAIL No. 6205 of 2025
8. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. October 28, 2025 Bhanu (Santosh Rai,J.)