Allahabad High Court
Haribhan Alias Monu Alias Ramakant vs State Of U.P. on 21 November, 2025
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:209436
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15885 of 2024
Haribhan Alias Monu Alias Ramakant
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Rakesh Kumar Rathore, Sanjeev Kumar, Shashi Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
Harish Chandra Shukla, G.A., Narendra Singh
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Kamal Krishna, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Rakesh Kumar Rathore, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Harish Chandra Shukla, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.265 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/25/27 Arms Act, Police Station Aunchha, District Mainpuri, during the pendency of trial.
4. It is submitted by learned Senior Counsel for the applicant that the case of applicant is at par with co-accused person, Ratnesh Alias Ranvijay Singh, who has already been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.4.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.11591 of 2024.
5. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has further stated that the applicant is languishing in jail since 13.12.2023, having no criminal history. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.
6. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co-accused and of no criminal history of the applicant, have not been disputed by him.
7. Learned counsel for the informant has opposed the bail application on the ground that there is recovery of a CMP at the pointing out of the applicant, as such, he is not entitled for bail.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and also taking into consideration the judgment of the Supreme Court passed in the case of Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and the judgment of this Court passed in the case of Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Cri.L.J. 938 coupled with the judgment of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail on the ground of parity. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.
9. Let the applicant- Haribhan Alias Monu Alias Ramakant involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
11. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
12. It 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 on the testimony of the witnesses.
(Krishan Pahal,J.) November 21, 2025 Vikas Verma
