High Court · 2025

2. Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, 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- Satish, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 479 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 61(2) A B.N.S., Police Station Khatauli, District Muzaffar Nagar.

4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 30.11.2024 under Sections 109 B.N.S. by Vansh Tanwar against two motorcycle borne unknown persons alleging there that on 30.11.2024 he with his friend Aditya was going on his motorcycle which was being driven by him towards Khatauli and when he reached Sardhan Village near the primary school then at about 11:30 am two unknown persons on motorcycle came and fired upon them. The shot hit him in his abdomen. His report be lodged and action be taken.

5. Subsequently the statement of the informant / injured was recorded in which he reiterated the version as stated by him in the first information report but further stated that he is having an enmity with his bua with regard to land and cases between them are going on. Aditya the person accompanying the informant was interrogated who also reiterated the version of the first information report.

6. Subsequently the informant Vansh Tanwar died on 02.12.2024 at 2:15 pm and his postmortem examination was conducted in which the doctor found two stitched wounds on his body and the cause of death was opined as shock and haemorrhage as a result of antemortem injuries in a medically treated case of firearm injury as alleged.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is neither named in the first information report which has been lodged by Vansh Tanwar the deceased while he was in an injured condition nor in his statement recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. nor in the statement of the alleged eye-witnesses Aditya who was accompanying Vansh Tanwar on his motorcycle. It is submitted that subsequently the name of the applicant surfaced in the statement of Preetam Singh the Village Pradhan recorded on 12.12.2024. It is submitted that the implication of the applicant in the present case is an afterthought. There is delay in disclosure of the name of the applicant. It is submitted that the implication of the applicant is on the basis of an inadmissible evidence. It is argued that co-accused Smt. Babita Devi and Upendra have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 13.02.2025 and 07.03.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 2802 of 2025 and 8143 of 2025, the copy of the said orders are annexed as Annexure-SA-4 to the supplementary affidavit dated 27.04.2025. Further co- accused Yogesh and Pramendra Kumar have also been granted bail by the same co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.04.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5090 of 2025, the copy of the said order has been produced before the Court which is taken on record. It is submitted that the investigation in the present matter has concluded and a charge-sheet has been submitted against Yogesh Kumar, Pramendra Kumar, Satish (the applicant), Ajay @ Lukka, Smt. Babita and Sooraj for offences under Sections 103(1), 61(2) A B.N.S., the copy of which is annexed as Annexure-SA-3 to the said supplementary affidavit. It is submitted that the applicant is having criminal history of two cases in which in one case he has been acquitted of the charges by the trial court concerned whereas the other case is a case under the Gangsters Act, para 10 and annexure- SA-5 being the judgement & order of acquittal of the said supplementary affidavit along with para 29 of the affidavit have been placed before the Court. The applicant is in jail since 14.12.2024.

8. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

9. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is neither named in the first information report lodged by Vansh Tanwar the deceased while he was in an injured condition nor in his statement recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. nor in the statement of the alleged eye-witnesses Aditya who was accompanying him on his motorcycle. Co-accused Smt. Babita Devi, Upendra, Yogesh and Pramendra Kumar have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The criminal history of the applicant has been duly explained.

10. 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.

11. Let the applicant- Satish, 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.

12. 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.

13. The bail application is allowed.

14. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, 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- Satish, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 479 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 61(2) A B.N.S., Police Station Khatauli, District Muzaffar Nagar.

4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 30.11.2024 under Sections 109 B.N.S. by Vansh Tanwar against two motorcycle borne unknown persons alleging there that on 30.11.2024 he with his friend Aditya was going on his motorcycle which was being driven by him towards Khatauli and when he reached Sardhan Village near the primary school then at about 11:30 am two unknown persons on motorcycle came and fired upon them. The shot hit him in his abdomen. His report be lodged and action be taken.

5. Subsequently the statement of the informant / injured was recorded in which he reiterated the version as stated by him in the first information report but further stated that he is having an enmity with his bua with regard to land and cases between them are going on. Aditya the person accompanying the informant was interrogated who also reiterated the version of the first information report.

6. Subsequently the informant Vansh Tanwar died on 02.12.2024 at 2:15 pm and his postmortem examination was conducted in which the doctor found two stitched wounds on his body and the cause of death was opined as shock and haemorrhage as a result of antemortem injuries in a medically treated case of firearm injury as alleged.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is neither named in the first information report which has been lodged by Vansh Tanwar the deceased while he was in an injured condition nor in his statement recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. nor in the statement of the alleged eye-witnesses Aditya who was accompanying Vansh Tanwar on his motorcycle. It is submitted that subsequently the name of the applicant surfaced in the statement of Preetam Singh the Village Pradhan recorded on 12.12.2024. It is submitted that the implication of the applicant in the present case is an afterthought. There is delay in disclosure of the name of the applicant. It is submitted that the implication of the applicant is on the basis of an inadmissible evidence. It is argued that co-accused Smt. Babita Devi and Upendra have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 13.02.2025 and 07.03.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 2802 of 2025 and 8143 of 2025, the copy of the said orders are annexed as Annexure-SA-4 to the supplementary affidavit dated 27.04.2025. Further co- accused Yogesh and Pramendra Kumar have also been granted bail by the same co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.04.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5090 of 2025, the copy of the said order has been produced before the Court which is taken on record. It is submitted that the investigation in the present matter has concluded and a charge-sheet has been submitted against Yogesh Kumar, Pramendra Kumar, Satish (the applicant), Ajay @ Lukka, Smt. Babita and Sooraj for offences under Sections 103(1), 61(2) A B.N.S., the copy of which is annexed as Annexure-SA-3 to the said supplementary affidavit. It is submitted that the applicant is having criminal history of two cases in which in one case he has been acquitted of the charges by the trial court concerned whereas the other case is a case under the Gangsters Act, para 10 and annexure- SA-5 being the judgement & order of acquittal of the said supplementary affidavit along with para 29 of the affidavit have been placed before the Court. The applicant is in jail since 14.12.2024.

8. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

9. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is neither named in the first information report lodged by Vansh Tanwar the deceased while he was in an injured condition nor in his statement recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. nor in the statement of the alleged eye-witnesses Aditya who was accompanying him on his motorcycle. Co-accused Smt. Babita Devi, Upendra, Yogesh and Pramendra Kumar have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The criminal history of the applicant has been duly explained.

10. 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.

11. Let the applicant- Satish, 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.

12. 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.

13. The bail application is allowed.

14. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad