High Court · 2025

Applicant :- Chhotai Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhavesh Singh Jadaun,Satya Dheer Singh Jadaun,Satyajeet Singh Jadaun Counsel for Opposite Party :- Deepak Kumar Tripathi,G.A.,Yogesh Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Satya Dheer Singh Jadaun, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Yogesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the first informant 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 - Chhotai, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 321 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 109, 3(5), 103(1) B.N.S., Police Station Sandipanghat, District Kaushambi.

4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 27.11.2024 by Vaish Ahmad against the applicant and five other persons alleging therein that he used to do farming since the last 7- 8 years in Kachhar area. On 26.11.2024 at about 2:30 p.m., when he was going with his tractor for sowing wheat, the accused, namely, Roshan Pasi, Chhotai Pasi and Jamuna Prasad stopped him and told him to return back, after which he started collecting his bags, on which, the accused persons in which Roshan Pasi armed with country made pistol, Chhotai Pasi armed with rifle, Jamuna Prasad armed with a SBBL gun and Rajveer & Kanna armed with lathi and danda, came there after which Rajveer and Kanna assaulted him with lathi and danda, when he raised a shout people from village came there on which the accused persons started firing due to which Gulfam Ahmad, his cousin, received injury. Irfan and Faiz have also received injuries. The F.I.R. be lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that in the present matter Mohd. Faiz and Irfan are the alleged injured who were found to have received two injuries each and the doctor opined both the injuries to be simple in nature. It is submitted that Gulfam Ahmad subsequently died in S.R.N. Hospital on 08.12.2024 at about 10:00 a.m. The doctor found one stitched wound, two abrasions and one surgical wound (Tracheostomy) and the cause of death was opined as to subdural hematoma due to ante-mortem head injury. It is submitted that a supplementary report dated 19.12.2024 was also prepared by the doctor, who had described the injuries on the parietal region of the deceased as a laceration. It is submitted that insofar as the role assigned to the applicant is concerned, the same is of having a rifle with him and firing with it along with two other co-accused persons, namely, Roshan Pasi armed with country made pistol and Jumana Prasad armed with a SBBL gun but there is no specification as to who was the author of the said fatal injury. It is submitted that even the injury on the parietal region as received by the deceased Gulfam Ahmad is under dispute and the same cannot be said a fire arm injury as the said opinion is not decisive about it. It is submitted that as such the implication of the applicant is without any credible evidence. While placing paragraph 20 of the affidavit, it is submitted that a charge sheet in the matter has been submitted on which the court concerned has taken cognizance on 11.02.2025 and as such there is no chances of the applicant tampering with the evidence. It is further submitted while placing paragraph no. 21 of the affidavit, previously, the applicant was involved in three other cases but in two cases he has been acquitted by the trial court whereas, in one case under the Gangsters Act, he has been released on bail. It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 03.12.2024.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the first informant vehementkly opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and has been assigned the role of having a rifle and firing along with two other accused persons, who were also armed with fire arms. It is further submitted that other two co-accused are armed with lathi and danda and also alleged to have participated in the present matter. It is submitted that the bail of the applicant be thus rejected.

7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the role assigned to the applicant is of participation in the present incident along with a rifle. Two other co-accused persons are also alleged to be armed with fire arm and two other co-accused are alleged to armed with lathi and danda. The deceased was found to have received a laceration on the parietal area. There is no specific opinion of the doctor regarding the fact as to the weapon used. The said injury was fatal. The injuries received by the other two alleged injured, namely, Mohd. Faiz and Irfan were opined to be simple in nature and having duration of about two days.

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- Chhotai 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. (Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 11.4.2025 Manoj MANOJ KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Applicant :- Chhotai Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhavesh Singh Jadaun,Satya Dheer Singh Jadaun,Satyajeet Singh Jadaun Counsel for Opposite Party :- Deepak Kumar Tripathi,G.A.,Yogesh Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Satya Dheer Singh Jadaun, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Yogesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the first informant 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 - Chhotai, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 321 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 109, 3(5), 103(1) B.N.S., Police Station Sandipanghat, District Kaushambi.

4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 27.11.2024 by Vaish Ahmad against the applicant and five other persons alleging therein that he used to do farming since the last 7- 8 years in Kachhar area. On 26.11.2024 at about 2:30 p.m., when he was going with his tractor for sowing wheat, the accused, namely, Roshan Pasi, Chhotai Pasi and Jamuna Prasad stopped him and told him to return back, after which he started collecting his bags, on which, the accused persons in which Roshan Pasi armed with country made pistol, Chhotai Pasi armed with rifle, Jamuna Prasad armed with a SBBL gun and Rajveer & Kanna armed with lathi and danda, came there after which Rajveer and Kanna assaulted him with lathi and danda, when he raised a shout people from village came there on which the accused persons started firing due to which Gulfam Ahmad, his cousin, received injury. Irfan and Faiz have also received injuries. The F.I.R. be lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that in the present matter Mohd. Faiz and Irfan are the alleged injured who were found to have received two injuries each and the doctor opined both the injuries to be simple in nature. It is submitted that Gulfam Ahmad subsequently died in S.R.N. Hospital on 08.12.2024 at about 10:00 a.m. The doctor found one stitched wound, two abrasions and one surgical wound (Tracheostomy) and the cause of death was opined as to subdural hematoma due to ante-mortem head injury. It is submitted that a supplementary report dated 19.12.2024 was also prepared by the doctor, who had described the injuries on the parietal region of the deceased as a laceration. It is submitted that insofar as the role assigned to the applicant is concerned, the same is of having a rifle with him and firing with it along with two other co-accused persons, namely, Roshan Pasi armed with country made pistol and Jumana Prasad armed with a SBBL gun but there is no specification as to who was the author of the said fatal injury. It is submitted that even the injury on the parietal region as received by the deceased Gulfam Ahmad is under dispute and the same cannot be said a fire arm injury as the said opinion is not decisive about it. It is submitted that as such the implication of the applicant is without any credible evidence. While placing paragraph 20 of the affidavit, it is submitted that a charge sheet in the matter has been submitted on which the court concerned has taken cognizance on 11.02.2025 and as such there is no chances of the applicant tampering with the evidence. It is further submitted while placing paragraph no. 21 of the affidavit, previously, the applicant was involved in three other cases but in two cases he has been acquitted by the trial court whereas, in one case under the Gangsters Act, he has been released on bail. It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 03.12.2024.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the first informant vehementkly opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and has been assigned the role of having a rifle and firing along with two other accused persons, who were also armed with fire arms. It is further submitted that other two co-accused are armed with lathi and danda and also alleged to have participated in the present matter. It is submitted that the bail of the applicant be thus rejected.

7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the role assigned to the applicant is of participation in the present incident along with a rifle. Two other co-accused persons are also alleged to be armed with fire arm and two other co-accused are alleged to armed with lathi and danda. The deceased was found to have received a laceration on the parietal area. There is no specific opinion of the doctor regarding the fact as to the weapon used. The said injury was fatal. The injuries received by the other two alleged injured, namely, Mohd. Faiz and Irfan were opined to be simple in nature and having duration of about two days.

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- Chhotai 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. (Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 11.4.2025 Manoj MANOJ KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad