Allahabad High Court

RAMENDRA @ GUDDUversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 8 September 2026
Bench: VIKRAM D CHAUHAN

Holding

The Court held that the applicant had made out a case for bail and therefore granted bail.

Summary

Ramendra, an Assistant Store Keeper, was arrested in connection with the alleged loading of three trucks with 525 bags of urea and charged under several sections of the BNS and the Prevention of Corruption Act. He has been in custody since 14 May 2026 and has no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail but did not produce any material indicating a risk of flight, evidence tampering, or witness intimidation, nor any antecedent misconduct. The Court noted that co‑accused in the same case had already been released on bail and that the applicant had cooperated with the investigation. Considering the absence of any substantive reason to deny bail, the Court held that the applicant had made out a case for bail. Accordingly, bail was granted subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and a set of conditions to ensure his attendance and prevent interference with the trial.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offences alleged under the BNS and the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Whether there is a likelihood of the applicant fleeing, tampering with evidence, or intimidating witnesses if released on bail.

Legislation cited

BNS — s. 316(5), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2)
Prevention of Corruption Act — s. 3, 7

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
presumption of innocence
flight risk
witness tampering
Prevention of Corruption Act
Uttar Pradesh
urea theft

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31462 of 2026

Ramendra @ Guddu
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arvind Giri, Jitendra Kumar Shishodia,
Krishna Gautam, Shivam Kumar
Rawat, Swati Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 55
HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.

1. Learned A.G.A. for the State submits that instructions have been

received and has no objection in case the bail application is heard on
merits.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State

and perused the record.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is

the Assistant Store Keeper. Applicant was not apprehended from the spot.

It is submitted that the alleged three trucks were alleged to have been

loaded with 525 bags of urea, each were intercepted. The amount has not

been transferred in the account of the applicant. Co accused namely

Harendra Pal Singh (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 25478 of 2026

vide order dated 24.07.2026), Yash Raghav (Criminal Misc. Bail

Application No. 26437 of 2026 vide order dated 30.07.2026), Divyanshu

Verma (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 25272 of 2026 vide order

dated 04.08.2026) and Mohammad Haroon Alias Mo Haroon (Criminal

Misc. Bail Application No. 25394 of 2026 vide order dated 06.08.2026)
BAIL No. 31462 of 2026
2

have already been enlarged on bail by this Court. The applicant has no

criminal history. Applicant is languishing in jail since 14.05.2026 and in

case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will

cooperate in the trial.

4. Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but does not

dispute factual matrix of the case.

5. Learned AGA for the State has not brought any fact or circumstances to

indicate criminal history or antecedents of the applicant which would

disentitle the applicant for Bail.

6. It is not the case of the State that there is a possibility of interdicting

fair trial by the accused-applicant if released on bail. No material has been

shown that the Applicant is of such character that his mere presence at

large would intimidate the witnesses or there is any material to show that

applicant will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the

evidence.

7. The object of the bail is to secure the attendance of the accused, the

detention of the accused pending trial cannot be punitive in nature as there

is presumption of innocence in favour of the accused person. Learned

A.G.A. has not brought any facts and circumstances to demonstrate that

the character of the accused-applicant (s) is such that his mere presence at
large would intimidate the witness.

8. Learned A.G.A. has not placed any reasonable apprehension of the

witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/State will

be at peril in case the Applicant is released on bail.
BAIL No. 31462 of 2026
3

9. It is not the case of the State that the applicant has been convicted for

any offence on previous occasion.

10. No material has been placed by the opposite party that the Applicant

in the past has attempted to evade the process of law. Further, no material

facts and circumstances have been placed to show that it is not in public

interest or interest of society at large to release the applicant on bail.

11. No material has been shown to suggest that the applicant is at flight

risk, has chance of repeating the offence, or intimidating the witness if

enlarged on bail.

12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence,

evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of learned counsel for

the parties 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.

The charge sheet in the case has already been submitted. The bail

application is allowed.

13. Let the applicant Ramendra @ Guddu involved in Case Crime No.

206 of 2026, under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 336(3), 338, 316(5), 340(2) of

BNS and Section 3/7 Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station

Anupshahar, District Bulandshahr 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 the following conditions:-

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

ii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed,
BAIL No. 31462 of 2026
4

unless personal presence is exempted and/or the applicant shall make

himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when

required.

iv. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of

which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is

suspected.

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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police

officer or tamper with the evidence.

vi. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of

the Court.

vii. In the event, the applicant changes residential address, the applicant

shall inform the court concerned about new residential address in writing.

14. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall

be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)
September 9, 2026
Aiman

Digitally signed by :-
AIMAN FAROOQUI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…