High Court · 2025

2. Heard Sri Vivek Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on records.

3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Karan Jaiswal, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 283 of 2024, under Sections 140(1), 333, 324(4), 115(2), 191(2), 103(1), 238 B.N.S., Police Station Kotwali, District Basti.

4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 12.07.2024 by Avinash Singh against five named persons namely Aditya Vikram Singh, Pulkit Garg, Satyam Kasaudhan, Monu, Sayed Ilhan along with other unknown persons alleging therein that on 12.07.2024 at about 2 pm he received an information from the persons of locality that in his house there is disturbance going on and also the people are breaking things on which he reached there then Saurabh Dubey told him that Mohit Yadav @ Ratnesh Yadav who was given a place to live on rent was assaulted by the accused persons and when he rushed into bathroom then the accused persons dragged him, pulled him and took him in a four wheeler. The incident was informed to the police at 112 no. at 2.30 pm after which the police searched for him for about 2-3 hours but could not trace him. Since he was the landlord, he on having suspicion of some unforeseen incident has come to lodge a report. A report be lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the matter was investigated and during investigation it transpired that Saurabh Dubey and Rishu Pandey were the alleged eye-witnesses of the incident. Their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. were recorded who did not name the applicant. Subsequently their supplementary statements were recorded for the second time who then named the applicant and other accused persons as the accused and submitted that they had seen the incident and earlier could not disclose their names. It is submitted that subsequently the charge-sheet in the matter was submitted against the applicant and 15 other persons. It is submitted that naming of the applicant in the present matter is an afterthought just in order to falsely implicate & harass the him. It is submitted that there is no recovery of any incriminating material either from the possession or on the pointing out of the applicant. It is submitted that the applicant has no motive to commit the aforesaid offence. It is submitted that the applicant is not named in the first information report. It is argued that co-accused Vipin Gupta & Amit Singh have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 10.12.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 44015 of 2024 and 44183 of 2024. Further co-accused Ashutosh Pathak, Prateek Mishra have been granted bail by the same co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 11.12.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 45221 of 2024 and 45371 of 2024. Further co-accused Anudraksh Pandey, Ashif and Prerit Pal have also been granted bail by the same co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 13.12.2024, 10.02.2025 and 12.03.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 45740 of 2024, 46409 of 2024 and 971 of 2025, the copy of the said orders are annexed as Annexure-SA-3 to the supplementary affidavit dated 15.04.2025. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 32 of the affidavit and is in jail since 14.07.2024.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid arguments.

7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is not named in the first information report. The naming of the applicant has surfaced in the present matter in the supplementary statement of the alleged eye-witnesses Saurabh Dubey and Rishu Pandey. Co-accused Vipin Gupta, Amit Singh, Ashutosh Pathak, Prateek Mishra, Anudraksh Pandey, Ashif and Prerit Pal have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

9. Let the applicant- Karan Jaiswal, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 B.N.S.S., 2023 may be issued and if 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 209 B.N.S., 2023. (v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 B.N.S., 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 28.4.2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri Vivek Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on records.

3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Karan Jaiswal, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 283 of 2024, under Sections 140(1), 333, 324(4), 115(2), 191(2), 103(1), 238 B.N.S., Police Station Kotwali, District Basti.

4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 12.07.2024 by Avinash Singh against five named persons namely Aditya Vikram Singh, Pulkit Garg, Satyam Kasaudhan, Monu, Sayed Ilhan along with other unknown persons alleging therein that on 12.07.2024 at about 2 pm he received an information from the persons of locality that in his house there is disturbance going on and also the people are breaking things on which he reached there then Saurabh Dubey told him that Mohit Yadav @ Ratnesh Yadav who was given a place to live on rent was assaulted by the accused persons and when he rushed into bathroom then the accused persons dragged him, pulled him and took him in a four wheeler. The incident was informed to the police at 112 no. at 2.30 pm after which the police searched for him for about 2-3 hours but could not trace him. Since he was the landlord, he on having suspicion of some unforeseen incident has come to lodge a report. A report be lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the matter was investigated and during investigation it transpired that Saurabh Dubey and Rishu Pandey were the alleged eye-witnesses of the incident. Their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. were recorded who did not name the applicant. Subsequently their supplementary statements were recorded for the second time who then named the applicant and other accused persons as the accused and submitted that they had seen the incident and earlier could not disclose their names. It is submitted that subsequently the charge-sheet in the matter was submitted against the applicant and 15 other persons. It is submitted that naming of the applicant in the present matter is an afterthought just in order to falsely implicate & harass the him. It is submitted that there is no recovery of any incriminating material either from the possession or on the pointing out of the applicant. It is submitted that the applicant has no motive to commit the aforesaid offence. It is submitted that the applicant is not named in the first information report. It is argued that co-accused Vipin Gupta & Amit Singh have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 10.12.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 44015 of 2024 and 44183 of 2024. Further co-accused Ashutosh Pathak, Prateek Mishra have been granted bail by the same co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 11.12.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 45221 of 2024 and 45371 of 2024. Further co-accused Anudraksh Pandey, Ashif and Prerit Pal have also been granted bail by the same co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 13.12.2024, 10.02.2025 and 12.03.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 45740 of 2024, 46409 of 2024 and 971 of 2025, the copy of the said orders are annexed as Annexure-SA-3 to the supplementary affidavit dated 15.04.2025. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 32 of the affidavit and is in jail since 14.07.2024.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid arguments.

7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is not named in the first information report. The naming of the applicant has surfaced in the present matter in the supplementary statement of the alleged eye-witnesses Saurabh Dubey and Rishu Pandey. Co-accused Vipin Gupta, Amit Singh, Ashutosh Pathak, Prateek Mishra, Anudraksh Pandey, Ashif and Prerit Pal have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

9. Let the applicant- Karan Jaiswal, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 B.N.S.S., 2023 may be issued and if 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 209 B.N.S., 2023. (v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 B.N.S., 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 28.4.2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad