Rahul Sharma v. State of U.P

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18118 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Ankit Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record.

¶3Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 84 of 2007, under Section 25 of Arms Act, Police Station - Loni, District - Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the instant case was instituted with the main case which was registered as Case Crime No. 83 of 2007, u/s 398/401 IPC, P.S. Loni, District-Ghaziabad in which the applicant was enlarged on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated

9.9.2025 passed in C.M.B.A. No. 18071 of 2025.

¶5Learned counsel has stated that the instant case has been instituted against the applicant by showing false recovery of country made pistol. Criminal history of other cases assigned to the applicant has been explained in the affidavit. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.03.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.

¶6Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhinav Gaur, Ankit Shukla, Saurabh Rai, Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rahul Sharma .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)

¶7In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail.

¶8Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence, severity of punishment and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶9Let the applicant-Rahul Sharma, who is involved in aforementioned case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.

ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶10In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶11It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 26, 2025 Siddhant BAIL No. 18118 of 2025 (Krishan Pahal,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad