Allahabad High Court

1. Heard Sri Vineet Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant, learned AGA for the State-respondent and Sri Uma Kant Gupta, learned counsel for the complainant.

2. This is the first bail application of the appellant/applicant Hansraj in Sessions Trial No.334 of 2008, arising out of Case Crime No.48 of 2008, Police Station- Bachhrawan, District- Raebareli wherein the appellant has been convicted under Sections 302/149, 323/149 & 148 IPC and sentenced for maximum period of imprisonment with fine stipulations.

3. This Court has passed order dated 10.11.2025, which reads as under:- "1. Heard Sri Vineet Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant, Sri Vijay Prakash Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State-respondent and Sri Uma Kant Gupta, learned counsel for the complainant.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant has filed affidavit, the same is taken on record.

3. This is the first bail application of the appellant-applicant Hansraj in Sessions Trial No.334 of 2008, arising out of Case Crime No.48 of 2008, Police Station- Bachhrawan, District- Raebareli wherein the appellant has been convicted under Sections 302/149, 323/149 & 148 IPC and sentenced for maximum period of life 2 CRLA No. 3018 of 2024 imprisonment with fine stipulations.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant has filed affidavit indicating therein that the present appellant is suffering from oral/ mouth cancer, his condition is critical and his treatment is going on in jail but he is not being provided proper treatment.

5. Let current medical report of the present appellant/ applicant be provided to the Court by the Superintendent of Jail, Raebareli within a week.

6. List on 18.11.2025.

7. This matter may be taken up immediately after lunch.

8. Let a copy of this order be provided to the Superintendent of Jail, Raebareli by the Registry of this Court within 24 hours for its compliance."

4. In compliance of the aforesaid order, Superintendent of Jail, Raebareli has provided a latest medical examination report of the present appellant/ applicant, the same is available on record. This is a detailed medical report enclosing therewith the Endoscopic/Small/Needle Biopsy Report dated 21.10.2025, FNAC report dated 22.09.2025, detailed culture report as well as medical prescription, all being issued from All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Raebareli. The Medical Officer, District Jail, Raebareli has precisely indicated the ailment of the present appellant/ applicant vide medical report dated 15.11.2025, which reads as under:- "Convicted prisoner Hansraj son of baljnath Age about-43 year complained of growth over his right border of tongue in September 2025. He was shown at ENT OPD of AIIMS raebareli. FNAC and biopsy were performed and it proved to be cancer of tongue. His CT scan and MRI has been done and his further treatment will be planned at AIIMS raebarell. Presently, he is getting treatment at jail hospital and current condition is stable. But may deteriorate any time due to serious nature of illness"

5. Perusal of the aforesaid medical report clearly reveals that the present appellant/ applicant is having tongue cancer and his condition may likely to deteriorate any time due to serious nature of illness. Therefore, mainly considering the aforesaid ailment of the appellant/ 3 CRLA No. 3018 of 2024 applicant, we are considering this bail application.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant/applicant has stated that the appellant/applicant is in jail since 17.08.2024 i.e. after the order of conviction. He remained in jail during the course of trial for some time but granted bail and he did not misuse the liberty of bail during the course of the trial. Sri Mishra has also pressed this bail application on the ground that two co-convict persons, namely Rama Shankar and Ram Milan have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 10.01.2025 passed in Criminal Appeals No.2717 of 2024 and 2912 of 2024. Both the aforesaid co-convict persons have been granted bail for the reason that they have not killed the deceased and they have been attributed the role of exhortation. Learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court towards the conviction order showing the statement of PW-1, who is wife of the deceased, namely, Ram Pyari. In her statement recorded before the Court, she has categorically stated that all accused persons were present on the spot. Convict Rama Shankar, Ram Milan and Ranjeet had exhorted. Co- convict Ram Prasad and Hansraj both had fired upon her husband to kill him but the fire of present appellant/applicant Hansraj was missed and co- convict Ram Prasad fired on the chest of her husband, resultant thereof, he died. Therefore, learned counsel has stated that it is the co-convict Ram Prasad, who fired upon her husband and gun-shot of appellant/applicant Hansraj was missed, therefore, present appellant Hansraj may be enlarged on bail on the basis of principles of parity. Further, the appellant/applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant undertakes that he shall argue the appeal on merits as and when it is listed.

7. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that both Ram Prasad and Hansraj had fired upon the deceased and even if the fire of Hansraj was missed, it may not be presumed that he had no intention to kill the deceased. They have further submitted that though fatal injury was caused by co-convict Ram Prasad and appellant/applicant Hansraj could not cause that injury but both are the main assailants, therefore, this bail application may be rejected. 4 CRLA No. 3018 of 2024

8. Having considered the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, perusing the material available on record, without entering into merits of the appeal; considering the fact that the present appellant/applicant Hansraj has not caused fatal injury as his gun-shot was missed; co-convict Rama Shankar and Ram Milan have been granted bail by this Court; the present appellant/applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; mainly, considering the fact that the appellant/applicant is suffering from tongue cancer and his condition may likely to deteriorate any time due to serious nature of illness as per medical report of the Medical Officer, District Jail, Raebareli dated 15.11.2025 and undertaking of the learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant that he shall argue the appeal on merits as and when it is next listed, we find it appropriate to release the appellant/ applicant on bail.

9. Accordingly, the bail application is disposed of.

10. Let appellant/ applicant- Hansraj convict of the aforesaid sessions trial be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

11. As soon as personal bonds and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the Trial Court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal.

12. It is further made clear that during bail, if the appellant/ applicant commits any offence, the prosecution will be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.

13. Out of total fine imposed by the learned Trial Court, 50% fine shall be deposited by the appellant/ applicant within a period of eight weeks from the date of release and rest 50% fine shall remain stayed. If 50% fine is not deposited within the aforesaid stipulated time, the bail granted to the appellant shall stand cancelled and he shall be arrested and sent to jail to serve out the sentence. (Order on Criminal Appeal)

14. Office is directed to prepare the paper-book, if not already prepared, and provide a copy of the same to learned counsels for the parties, as per 5 CRLA No. 3018 of 2024 Rules.

15. List the appeal in the week commencing 26.01.2026 for final hearing. (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) November 18, 2025 RBS/-

1. Heard Sri Vineet Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant, learned AGA for the State-respondent and Sri Uma Kant Gupta, learned counsel for the complainant.

2. This is the first bail application of the appellant/applicant Hansraj in Sessions Trial No.334 of 2008, arising out of Case Crime No.48 of 2008, Police Station- Bachhrawan, District- Raebareli wherein the appellant has been convicted under Sections 302/149, 323/149 & 148 IPC and sentenced for maximum period of imprisonment with fine stipulations.

3. This Court has passed order dated 10.11.2025, which reads as under:- "1. Heard Sri Vineet Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant, Sri Vijay Prakash Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State-respondent and Sri Uma Kant Gupta, learned counsel for the complainant.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant has filed affidavit, the same is taken on record.

3. This is the first bail application of the appellant-applicant Hansraj in Sessions Trial No.334 of 2008, arising out of Case Crime No.48 of 2008, Police Station- Bachhrawan, District- Raebareli wherein the appellant has been convicted under Sections 302/149, 323/149 & 148 IPC and sentenced for maximum period of life 2 CRLA No. 3018 of 2024 imprisonment with fine stipulations.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant has filed affidavit indicating therein that the present appellant is suffering from oral/ mouth cancer, his condition is critical and his treatment is going on in jail but he is not being provided proper treatment.

5. Let current medical report of the present appellant/ applicant be provided to the Court by the Superintendent of Jail, Raebareli within a week.

6. List on 18.11.2025.

7. This matter may be taken up immediately after lunch.

8. Let a copy of this order be provided to the Superintendent of Jail, Raebareli by the Registry of this Court within 24 hours for its compliance."

4. In compliance of the aforesaid order, Superintendent of Jail, Raebareli has provided a latest medical examination report of the present appellant/ applicant, the same is available on record. This is a detailed medical report enclosing therewith the Endoscopic/Small/Needle Biopsy Report dated 21.10.2025, FNAC report dated 22.09.2025, detailed culture report as well as medical prescription, all being issued from All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Raebareli. The Medical Officer, District Jail, Raebareli has precisely indicated the ailment of the present appellant/ applicant vide medical report dated 15.11.2025, which reads as under:- "Convicted prisoner Hansraj son of baljnath Age about-43 year complained of growth over his right border of tongue in September 2025. He was shown at ENT OPD of AIIMS raebareli. FNAC and biopsy were performed and it proved to be cancer of tongue. His CT scan and MRI has been done and his further treatment will be planned at AIIMS raebarell. Presently, he is getting treatment at jail hospital and current condition is stable. But may deteriorate any time due to serious nature of illness"

5. Perusal of the aforesaid medical report clearly reveals that the present appellant/ applicant is having tongue cancer and his condition may likely to deteriorate any time due to serious nature of illness. Therefore, mainly considering the aforesaid ailment of the appellant/ 3 CRLA No. 3018 of 2024 applicant, we are considering this bail application.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant/applicant has stated that the appellant/applicant is in jail since 17.08.2024 i.e. after the order of conviction. He remained in jail during the course of trial for some time but granted bail and he did not misuse the liberty of bail during the course of the trial. Sri Mishra has also pressed this bail application on the ground that two co-convict persons, namely Rama Shankar and Ram Milan have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 10.01.2025 passed in Criminal Appeals No.2717 of 2024 and 2912 of 2024. Both the aforesaid co-convict persons have been granted bail for the reason that they have not killed the deceased and they have been attributed the role of exhortation. Learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court towards the conviction order showing the statement of PW-1, who is wife of the deceased, namely, Ram Pyari. In her statement recorded before the Court, she has categorically stated that all accused persons were present on the spot. Convict Rama Shankar, Ram Milan and Ranjeet had exhorted. Co- convict Ram Prasad and Hansraj both had fired upon her husband to kill him but the fire of present appellant/applicant Hansraj was missed and co- convict Ram Prasad fired on the chest of her husband, resultant thereof, he died. Therefore, learned counsel has stated that it is the co-convict Ram Prasad, who fired upon her husband and gun-shot of appellant/applicant Hansraj was missed, therefore, present appellant Hansraj may be enlarged on bail on the basis of principles of parity. Further, the appellant/applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant undertakes that he shall argue the appeal on merits as and when it is listed.

7. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that both Ram Prasad and Hansraj had fired upon the deceased and even if the fire of Hansraj was missed, it may not be presumed that he had no intention to kill the deceased. They have further submitted that though fatal injury was caused by co-convict Ram Prasad and appellant/applicant Hansraj could not cause that injury but both are the main assailants, therefore, this bail application may be rejected. 4 CRLA No. 3018 of 2024

8. Having considered the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, perusing the material available on record, without entering into merits of the appeal; considering the fact that the present appellant/applicant Hansraj has not caused fatal injury as his gun-shot was missed; co-convict Rama Shankar and Ram Milan have been granted bail by this Court; the present appellant/applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; mainly, considering the fact that the appellant/applicant is suffering from tongue cancer and his condition may likely to deteriorate any time due to serious nature of illness as per medical report of the Medical Officer, District Jail, Raebareli dated 15.11.2025 and undertaking of the learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant that he shall argue the appeal on merits as and when it is next listed, we find it appropriate to release the appellant/ applicant on bail.

9. Accordingly, the bail application is disposed of.

10. Let appellant/ applicant- Hansraj convict of the aforesaid sessions trial be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

11. As soon as personal bonds and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the Trial Court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal.

12. It is further made clear that during bail, if the appellant/ applicant commits any offence, the prosecution will be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.

13. Out of total fine imposed by the learned Trial Court, 50% fine shall be deposited by the appellant/ applicant within a period of eight weeks from the date of release and rest 50% fine shall remain stayed. If 50% fine is not deposited within the aforesaid stipulated time, the bail granted to the appellant shall stand cancelled and he shall be arrested and sent to jail to serve out the sentence. (Order on Criminal Appeal)

14. Office is directed to prepare the paper-book, if not already prepared, and provide a copy of the same to learned counsels for the parties, as per 5 CRLA No. 3018 of 2024 Rules.

15. List the appeal in the week commencing 26.01.2026 for final hearing. (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) November 18, 2025 RBS/-