High Court

1. Heard Sri Arun Sinha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ranvijay Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Nagendra Kumar Verma) is languishing in jail since 05.08.2025 in Case Crime No.224 of 2024, under Sections 103(1) B.N.S. (302 IPC), 351(3) B.N.S. (506 IPC), Police Station- Jahangirabad, District- Barabanki. He has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

3. Attention has been drawn towards impugned FIR, wherein the specific allegation has been levelled against named accused Rakesh Kumar. The allegation has been levelled against four unknown persons whose antecedents and names are not known to the applicant, therefore, as per Sri Sinha, the present applicant is not named in the impugned FIR. As per Sri Sinha, the present applicant is a student, studying law. He is having no criminal history of any kind whatsoever. On the basis of impugned FIR, the statement of three women who are said to be eye witnesses have been recorded but no one has alleged any thing against the present applicant though they have stated that the main accused and four unknown persons have assaulted the deceased. One application had been filed on behalf of the applicant for identification but the exercise of identification could not take place. As per prosecution story, one pipe has been recovered allegedly on the pointing out of the present applicant, however, in the FIR and statement of three women, the pipe is not a weapon to assault. As per prosecution story, the main accused Rakesh Kumar and his companions have assaulted the deceased through iron rod.

4. Sri Sinha has further stated that there is no prior enmity of the present applicant with the deceased or his family members though the main accused Rakesh Kumar was having enmity with the deceased and his family members. During investigation, the statement of one Prince, who is cousin of the deceased has been recorded, who has said that the main accused Rakesh Kumar, present applicant and three others have assaulted the victim/deceased. Though, the informant had initially not levelled any allegation against the present applicant but after the statement of Prince having been recorded, the complainant has recorded a supplementary statement (Majeed Bayan) alleging the name of the present applicant. Whereafter, the confessional statement of present applicant has also been recorded within police custody, which is extra judicial confessional which is having no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. The impugned recovery had taken place after recording the confessional statement of the present applicant. The present applicant was having no intention or motive to kill the deceased. Charge-sheet has been filed.

5. The learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted.

6. Learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that one pipe has been recovered on the pointing out of the applicant, however, he did not dispute the contention of learned counsel for the applicant.

7. Therefore, without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that the applicant is a student, studying law; the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; and the undertaking that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.

8. Bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant (Nagendra Kumar Verma), involved in aforesaid case crime 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./ 84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 may be issued and if the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code/ 208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./ 351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned. Order Date :- 1.7.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.)

1. Heard Sri Arun Sinha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ranvijay Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Nagendra Kumar Verma) is languishing in jail since 05.08.2025 in Case Crime No.224 of 2024, under Sections 103(1) B.N.S. (302 IPC), 351(3) B.N.S. (506 IPC), Police Station- Jahangirabad, District- Barabanki. He has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

3. Attention has been drawn towards impugned FIR, wherein the specific allegation has been levelled against named accused Rakesh Kumar. The allegation has been levelled against four unknown persons whose antecedents and names are not known to the applicant, therefore, as per Sri Sinha, the present applicant is not named in the impugned FIR. As per Sri Sinha, the present applicant is a student, studying law. He is having no criminal history of any kind whatsoever. On the basis of impugned FIR, the statement of three women who are said to be eye witnesses have been recorded but no one has alleged any thing against the present applicant though they have stated that the main accused and four unknown persons have assaulted the deceased. One application had been filed on behalf of the applicant for identification but the exercise of identification could not take place. As per prosecution story, one pipe has been recovered allegedly on the pointing out of the present applicant, however, in the FIR and statement of three women, the pipe is not a weapon to assault. As per prosecution story, the main accused Rakesh Kumar and his companions have assaulted the deceased through iron rod.

4. Sri Sinha has further stated that there is no prior enmity of the present applicant with the deceased or his family members though the main accused Rakesh Kumar was having enmity with the deceased and his family members. During investigation, the statement of one Prince, who is cousin of the deceased has been recorded, who has said that the main accused Rakesh Kumar, present applicant and three others have assaulted the victim/deceased. Though, the informant had initially not levelled any allegation against the present applicant but after the statement of Prince having been recorded, the complainant has recorded a supplementary statement (Majeed Bayan) alleging the name of the present applicant. Whereafter, the confessional statement of present applicant has also been recorded within police custody, which is extra judicial confessional which is having no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. The impugned recovery had taken place after recording the confessional statement of the present applicant. The present applicant was having no intention or motive to kill the deceased. Charge-sheet has been filed.

5. The learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted.

6. Learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that one pipe has been recovered on the pointing out of the applicant, however, he did not dispute the contention of learned counsel for the applicant.

7. Therefore, without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that the applicant is a student, studying law; the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; and the undertaking that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.

8. Bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant (Nagendra Kumar Verma), involved in aforesaid case crime 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./ 84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 may be issued and if the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code/ 208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./ 351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned. Order Date :- 1.7.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.)