Sumit Negi vs State Of U.P.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri N.K. Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 352 of 2025, under Sections 309(4), 352, 351(3), 308(5) B.N.S., Police Station- Rawatpur, District- Kanpur Nagar during pendency of the trial.

3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have taken place on 18.7.2025, whereas the first information report was lodged on 25.8.2025. The inordinate delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. The applicant had executed the power of attorney in favour of co-accused Gajendra Singh Negi. The alleged sale deed was executed by co-accused Gajendra Singh Negi. The applicant and co-accused Gajendra Singh Negi have instituted a Civil Suit No. 605 of 2025 (Gajendra Singh Negi and others vs. M/s Y.S.Y.S. Builders and Developers (P) Ltd. and another) under Section 37(2) and 39 of Specif Relief Act for injunction and cancellation of sale deed dated 29.5.2018, pending before the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Division) Kanpur Nagar. The case is purely civil in nature. It is next contended that the co-accused Gajendra Singh Negi has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 26.3.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2962 of 2026 (Gajendra Singh Negi vs. State of U.P.). The applicant claims parity. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 42 of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 2.2.2026. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

4. Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the inordinate delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. The alleged sale deed was executed by co-accused Gajendra Singh Negi. The applicant and co-accused Gajendra Singh Negi have instituted a Civil Suit under Section 37(2) and 39 of Specif Relief Act for injunction and cancellation of sale deed dated 29.5.2018. The case is purely civil in nature. The co-accused Gajendra Singh Negi has been granted bail by this Court. Further, the applicant has presently remained confined for more than three months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

6. Let the applicant, Sumit Negi involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:

i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness;

iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

(Vivek Varma,J.)

May 7, 2026

S.S.