Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Pawan Kumar Gautam vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy./Addl. ...

Allahabad High Court7 May 2026

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where an applicant has been in custody for a substantial period, has explained his criminal history, and the court on hearing both parties and examining the record finds no impediment to bail, the court may enlarge the applicant on bail on the condition of furnishing personal bond and sureties, and may impose such further conditions as it deems fit and proper in the circumstances.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCHNeutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC-LKO:33069HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABADLUCKNOWCRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2795 of 2026Pawan Kumar Gautam.....Applicant(s)VersusState Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy./Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko......Opposite Party(s)Counsel for Applicant(s):Harpreet Singh, Gaurav Ojha, Shashvat Singh, Siddhant MishraCounsel for Opposite Party(s):G.A.Court No. - 28HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J.Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

This is first bail application filed on behalf of the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 214 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that in the same identical matter, the applicant has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 27.4.2026 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 3015 of 2026.

It is further submitted that the applicant has duly explained his criminal history of 15 cases including the present case in para 37 of the bail application and he is in jail since 26.2.2026. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the prosecution witnesses. He undertakes that in case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record and considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 26.2.2026; his criminal history has duly been explained and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

Let the applicant- Pawan Kumar Gautam involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court, either personally or through his counsel.

Any other condition(s) which the trial court/concerned court may deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case, may also be imposed.

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial.

(Rajeev Bharti,J.)

May 7, 2026

Shravan

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free