High Court

1. Sri Awinash Pandey, Advocate filed his power on behalf of the informant, which is taken on record.

2. Heard Ms. Anjali Singh Tomer, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Awinash Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Kunwar Tejendra Bahadur, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 445 of 2022, under Section 304 IPC, Police Station Kairana, District Shamli, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

4. FIR of the present case was lodged on 19.8.2022 against the applicant and as per allegation applicant was posted as SSO in the electricity department and on 11.8.2022 he did not take shut down due to which one lineman suffered with electric shock and died while he was working on the electric pole.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that entire allegation levelled against the applicant is totally false and at the worst, prima facie, it appears to be a case of mere negligence.

6. She further submitted that during investigation when applicant challanged the FIR of the present case before Division Bench of this Court in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 14085 of 2022 then on 27.9.2022 Division Bench of this Court was pleased to stay the arrest of the applicant, till submission of police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. and pursuant to the order passed by Division Bench of this Court during investigation applicant was not arrested.

7. She further submitted that after submission of the charge sheet when applicant applied for anticipatory bail then his anticipatory bail was dismissed by the court concerned and thereafter his anticipatory bail was also dismissed by this Court but when applicant challanged the order passed by this Court before Apex Court vide Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal No. 6199 of 2024) then initially Apex Court on 29.4.2024 protected the applicant but when on 12.7.2024 SLP filed by applicant was dismissed then applicant surrendered before the court concerned on 10.2.2025 and since then he is in jail.

8. She further submitted that there is absolutely no evidence that applicant was having any intention to cause death of the deceased and therefore, this case does not travel beyond section 304(2) IPC.

9. She further submitted that as arrest of the applicant was stayed during investigation, therefore, there is no occasion to detain him in jail, any further.

10. She further submitted that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 10.2.2025.

11. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

12. However, they further submitted that as anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant was dismissed by this Court and thereafter his SLP was also dismissed by the Apex Court, therefore, applicant should not be released on bail.

13. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

14. This case has chequered history and from the record, it reflects that initially arrest of the applicant was stayed by the Division Bench of this Court till submission of the police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. and when his anticipatory bail was dismissed by this Court and he filed SLP before the Apex Court then initially a protection order was passed in his favour but subsequently his SLP was dismissed and thereafter, he surrendered and since then he is in jail.

15. However, anticipatory bail application of the applicant has been dismissed by this Court and thereafter his SLP has also been dismissed by the Apex Court but parameters of bail and anticipatory bail are quite different and if anticipatory bail of an accused has been dismissed then merely on this ground, his bail application cannot be dismissed.

16. Further, as far as merit of the case is concerned, however, as per allegation applicant was posted as SSO in the electricity department and in spite of the fact that deceased who was lineman was working on the electric pole, he did not take the shut down due to which he died due to electric shock but considering the entire material available on record, argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that present case does not travel beyond section 304(2) IPC, cannot be ruled out, at this stage.

17. Further arrest of the applicant has been stayed by the Division Bench of this Court during investigation and he is having no criminal history and in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 10.2.2025.

18. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

19. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

20. Let the applicant-Vipin Kumar, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti- social activity.

21. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

22. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 10.4.2025/Ankita

1. Sri Awinash Pandey, Advocate filed his power on behalf of the informant, which is taken on record.

2. Heard Ms. Anjali Singh Tomer, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Awinash Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Kunwar Tejendra Bahadur, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 445 of 2022, under Section 304 IPC, Police Station Kairana, District Shamli, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

4. FIR of the present case was lodged on 19.8.2022 against the applicant and as per allegation applicant was posted as SSO in the electricity department and on 11.8.2022 he did not take shut down due to which one lineman suffered with electric shock and died while he was working on the electric pole.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that entire allegation levelled against the applicant is totally false and at the worst, prima facie, it appears to be a case of mere negligence.

6. She further submitted that during investigation when applicant challanged the FIR of the present case before Division Bench of this Court in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 14085 of 2022 then on 27.9.2022 Division Bench of this Court was pleased to stay the arrest of the applicant, till submission of police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. and pursuant to the order passed by Division Bench of this Court during investigation applicant was not arrested.

7. She further submitted that after submission of the charge sheet when applicant applied for anticipatory bail then his anticipatory bail was dismissed by the court concerned and thereafter his anticipatory bail was also dismissed by this Court but when applicant challanged the order passed by this Court before Apex Court vide Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal No. 6199 of 2024) then initially Apex Court on 29.4.2024 protected the applicant but when on 12.7.2024 SLP filed by applicant was dismissed then applicant surrendered before the court concerned on 10.2.2025 and since then he is in jail.

8. She further submitted that there is absolutely no evidence that applicant was having any intention to cause death of the deceased and therefore, this case does not travel beyond section 304(2) IPC.

9. She further submitted that as arrest of the applicant was stayed during investigation, therefore, there is no occasion to detain him in jail, any further.

10. She further submitted that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 10.2.2025.

11. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

12. However, they further submitted that as anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant was dismissed by this Court and thereafter his SLP was also dismissed by the Apex Court, therefore, applicant should not be released on bail.

13. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

14. This case has chequered history and from the record, it reflects that initially arrest of the applicant was stayed by the Division Bench of this Court till submission of the police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. and when his anticipatory bail was dismissed by this Court and he filed SLP before the Apex Court then initially a protection order was passed in his favour but subsequently his SLP was dismissed and thereafter, he surrendered and since then he is in jail.

15. However, anticipatory bail application of the applicant has been dismissed by this Court and thereafter his SLP has also been dismissed by the Apex Court but parameters of bail and anticipatory bail are quite different and if anticipatory bail of an accused has been dismissed then merely on this ground, his bail application cannot be dismissed.

16. Further, as far as merit of the case is concerned, however, as per allegation applicant was posted as SSO in the electricity department and in spite of the fact that deceased who was lineman was working on the electric pole, he did not take the shut down due to which he died due to electric shock but considering the entire material available on record, argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that present case does not travel beyond section 304(2) IPC, cannot be ruled out, at this stage.

17. Further arrest of the applicant has been stayed by the Division Bench of this Court during investigation and he is having no criminal history and in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 10.2.2025.

18. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

19. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

20. Let the applicant-Vipin Kumar, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti- social activity.

21. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

22. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 10.4.2025/Ankita