Sonu Parashar v. State of U.P

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33513 of 2025 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶2The accused applicant is involved in Case Crime No.628 of 2024 under Sections 340(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3) of B.N.S., Police Station Kotwali Sadabad, District Hathras.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegation against the applicant is that he had purchased the land, which was purchased by the informant along with other. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant had purchased the land Sharda Devi, the daughter of Radhcharan from the land was earlier purchased by the informant. He further submits that civil suit was also filed before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Sadabad, District Hathras being Suit No. 07 of 2025 in which the parties have amicable entered into compromise, copy of compromise is at page no. 56 of the paper book. Learned counsel further argued that due to misconception, the sale deed has been executed and the parties have entered into compromise, therefore the applicant may be enlarged on bail. It is thus contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also 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 and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 26.08.2025.

¶4Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the applicants. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Subedar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sonu Parashar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)

¶5Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶6Let the applicant Sonu Parashar be released on bail in the aforementioned case crime number on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

v) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶7In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the informant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court. September 26, 2025 S.Ali BAIL No. 33513 of 2025 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad