Sachin Kumar Saroj v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12295 of 2025 Court No. - 16 HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

¶1Heard Sri Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Devesh Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. Counter affidavit filed today by the learned AGA is taken on record.

¶2The present bail application has been filed by the applicant, who is involved in F.I.R./Case Crime No.78 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109, 105, 352, 351(3) of BNS, 2023, Police Station-Jayas, District-Amethi.

¶3It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. Learned counsel for applicant further submits that similarly situated co-accused namely, Vijay Kumar Saroj, Harish Chandra Saroj, Bhanmati, Seema, Kanchan and Neetu have been granted bail by another Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.12108 of 2025, 10009 of 2025, 7404 of 2025, 7805 of 2025, 8060 of 2025 and 8487 of 2025 respectively, photo copy of which orders have been provided today by learned counsel for the applicant, which are taken on record. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence, applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. It is lastly contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 10.4.2025. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ramakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sachin Kumar Saroj .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s)

¶4Learned A.G.A has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he has not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶5Considering 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 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶6Let applicant-Sachin Kumar Saroj be released on bail in the aforesaid F.I.R./case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(ii) 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. 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.

(iii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

(iv) The applicant will not indulge in any illegal activities during the period of bail.

(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court would be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. December 17, 2025 Sachin BAIL No. 12295 of 2025 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench