Arvind Pathak State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko v. Counsel for

2. Heard Sri Janardan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 0069 of 2025, under Sections 140(2), 317(2) BNS and 25/27/30 Arms Act, Police Station-Motiganj, District-Gonda.

4. While pressing the application for bail, learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case.

5. Learned Counsel for the applicant has stated that criminal history of two cases have been explained in paragraph-14 of the present application.

4. It is also stated that co-accused namely Vipin Kumar Singh has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 04.09.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6263 of 2025. The relevant portion of the order dated 04.09.2025 reads as under:- "2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.69 of 2025 under Sections 140(2), 317(2) of B.N.S. and 25/27/30 of Arms Act registered at Police Station- Motiganj, District- Gonda.

3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 13.05.2025 stating that unknown persons riding a four wheeler vehicle had kidnapped the informant's son Amit Kumar Verma at about 03:00 PM on 13.05.2025 and they had made a phone call from the phone of the victim to the informant's wife demanding Rs.75,000/- as a ransom.

4. The FIR was lodged on 13.05.2025 at about 11 hours and the police claimed to have intercepted the vehicle in question, arrested the accused persons and recovered the victim on 13.05.2025 itself. 2 BAIL No. 9666 of 2025

5. The recovery memo mentions that the applicant was driving the vehicle and the victim was sitting in the middle of the rear seat whereas the two co- accused persons were sitting left and right. The victim stated that he had paid Rs.10,000/- as ransom to the accused persons and the accused persons have withdrawn Rs.64,000/- using his Aadhar Card. A licensed revolver and nine cartridges were recovered from the applicant and a licensed rifle and three cartridges were recovered from the co-accused Arjun Pathak and Rs.74,000/- were recovered from the other co-accused Satendra Chaubey.

6. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case because of some monetary transaction between the parties.

7. The applicant's involvement in another criminal case has been shown in the affidavit filed in support of the affidavit in which the applicant's arrest has been stayed by means of an order dated 07.02.2025 passed by a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No.1083 of 2025.

8. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith material collected during investigation and a copy of charge-sheet submitted on 25.06.2025.

9. It is recorded in the charge-sheet that the bank statements of the victim disclosed that on the date of the incident, Rs.1,000/- were transferred from his bank account through online mode, Rs.4,000/- were withdrawn from Jan Seva Kendra in Katra Bazar, Rs.10,000/- were withdrawn through Bharat Pe and Rs.10,000/- were withdrawn from Paytm in Karnalganj. Rs.10,000/- were transferred through Paytm.

10. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the prosecution story appears to be inherently improbably as three persons, who have kidnapped the victim for demanding ransom, could demand Rs.75,000/-, they will not take him to various Grahak Seva Kendra/ATM in the market place and withdraw amounts from his bank account.

11. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and considering the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 13.05.2025 whereas the investigation stands concluded, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid case.

12. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed."

5. It is further stated that the applicant, having no criminal history, is in judicial custody since 13.05.2025. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, the applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty of bail and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is extremely bleak. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

6. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute the above contentions made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties including which are related to allegations made in the FIR and keeping in mind the period of incarceration as also that co-accused persons has already been released on bail by this Court as also chance of conclusion of trial in near future and 3 BAIL No. 9666 of 2025 without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

8. Let the applicant-Arjun Pathak alias Arvind Pathak be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond to the satisfaction of the court concerned forthwith. Applicant is also directed to furnish two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence. (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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (vi) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The applicant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

9. In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law

10. As this order relates to enlargement of the applicant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation(s) made in this order.

11. Application is disposed of. October 9, 2025 Jyoti/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

2. Heard Sri Janardan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 0069 of 2025, under Sections 140(2), 317(2) BNS and 25/27/30 Arms Act, Police Station-Motiganj, District-Gonda.

4. While pressing the application for bail, learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case.

5. Learned Counsel for the applicant has stated that criminal history of two cases have been explained in paragraph-14 of the present application.

4. It is also stated that co-accused namely Vipin Kumar Singh has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 04.09.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6263 of 2025. The relevant portion of the order dated 04.09.2025 reads as under:- "2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.69 of 2025 under Sections 140(2), 317(2) of B.N.S. and 25/27/30 of Arms Act registered at Police Station- Motiganj, District- Gonda.

3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 13.05.2025 stating that unknown persons riding a four wheeler vehicle had kidnapped the informant's son Amit Kumar Verma at about 03:00 PM on 13.05.2025 and they had made a phone call from the phone of the victim to the informant's wife demanding Rs.75,000/- as a ransom.

4. The FIR was lodged on 13.05.2025 at about 11 hours and the police claimed to have intercepted the vehicle in question, arrested the accused persons and recovered the victim on 13.05.2025 itself. 2 BAIL No. 9666 of 2025

5. The recovery memo mentions that the applicant was driving the vehicle and the victim was sitting in the middle of the rear seat whereas the two co- accused persons were sitting left and right. The victim stated that he had paid Rs.10,000/- as ransom to the accused persons and the accused persons have withdrawn Rs.64,000/- using his Aadhar Card. A licensed revolver and nine cartridges were recovered from the applicant and a licensed rifle and three cartridges were recovered from the co-accused Arjun Pathak and Rs.74,000/- were recovered from the other co-accused Satendra Chaubey.

6. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case because of some monetary transaction between the parties.

7. The applicant's involvement in another criminal case has been shown in the affidavit filed in support of the affidavit in which the applicant's arrest has been stayed by means of an order dated 07.02.2025 passed by a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No.1083 of 2025.

8. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith material collected during investigation and a copy of charge-sheet submitted on 25.06.2025.

9. It is recorded in the charge-sheet that the bank statements of the victim disclosed that on the date of the incident, Rs.1,000/- were transferred from his bank account through online mode, Rs.4,000/- were withdrawn from Jan Seva Kendra in Katra Bazar, Rs.10,000/- were withdrawn through Bharat Pe and Rs.10,000/- were withdrawn from Paytm in Karnalganj. Rs.10,000/- were transferred through Paytm.

10. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the prosecution story appears to be inherently improbably as three persons, who have kidnapped the victim for demanding ransom, could demand Rs.75,000/-, they will not take him to various Grahak Seva Kendra/ATM in the market place and withdraw amounts from his bank account.

11. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and considering the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 13.05.2025 whereas the investigation stands concluded, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid case.

12. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed."

5. It is further stated that the applicant, having no criminal history, is in judicial custody since 13.05.2025. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, the applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty of bail and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is extremely bleak. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

6. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute the above contentions made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties including which are related to allegations made in the FIR and keeping in mind the period of incarceration as also that co-accused persons has already been released on bail by this Court as also chance of conclusion of trial in near future and 3 BAIL No. 9666 of 2025 without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

8. Let the applicant-Arjun Pathak alias Arvind Pathak be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond to the satisfaction of the court concerned forthwith. Applicant is also directed to furnish two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence. (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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (vi) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The applicant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

9. In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law

10. As this order relates to enlargement of the applicant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation(s) made in this order.

11. Application is disposed of. October 9, 2025 Jyoti/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench