High Court · 2025

2. Heard Sri Vijay Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Suresh Dhar Dwivedi, 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- Ranvir Singh @ Banti, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 331 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 352, 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station Sirsaganj, District Firozabad.

4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 18.07.2024 by Kamal Kishore against the applicant, Akash Kumar, Ajay Kumar @ Manoj and Shivam Kumar alleging therein that his son Sarvesh Kumar was posted in the Home Guard department. Yesterday on 17.07.2024 he wanted his field to be ploughed for which he had a talk with Akash who was having a tractor for it being ploughed in the evening but when the tractor owner did not come for ploughing the field his son went to meet him and at that time Akash was ploughing the field of Sooraj Pal and then in the evening at about 7:30 pm the other accused persons including the applicant were present there and on some talks abused his son and caught-hold of him after which Akash drove the tractor many times on his son and thinking his son to be dead left him and ran away. On information the informant reached there and informed the police and with the help of an ambulance took his son to the District Hospital where doctors declared him dead. His son has been crushed by a tractor and has been murdered. A report be lodged and action be taken.

5. The postmortem examination of the deceased Sarvesh Kumar was conducted in which the doctor noted the following antemortem injuries:- "1. Abrasion over the left forearm on ant. surface size approx 4x3 cm present 4cm below left wrist joint.

2. On cut section - lacerated wound over the anterio-inferior surface size approx 6x3 cm in size." The cause of death was opined as due to shock & haemorrhage as a result of antemortem injuries. On probe the doctor found the liver and gall bladder to be lacerated and pale.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that Ramveer Singh has been interrogated as an eye-witness of the incident who states of the applicant, Ajay Kumar @ Manoj and Shivam Kumar exhorting co-accused Akash to run the tractor on the deceased and kill him after which co-accused Akash drove the tractor on the deceased Sarvesh Kumar and murdered him. It is submitted that as such the role of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co-accused Akash. It is submitted that even otherwise the medical examination of the deceased does not corroborate with the prosecution evidence in as much as the injuries as noted by the doctor being the antemortem injuries do not in any manner corroborate with the prosecution case as a perusal of the same would go to show they are not the injuries received by running of a tractor. It is submitted that the investigation in the matter has concluded and a charge-sheet has been submitted, copy of which is annexed as Annexure-SA-2 to the supplementary affidavit dated 04.04.2025. It is submitted that there is no independent witness to the incident. It is submitted that the applicant is having criminal history of two cases but in both the cases he is on bail, paragraph 2 and Annexure-SA-1 to the said supplementary affidavit being bail orders have been placed before the Court. The applicant is in jail since 14.08.2024.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the first informant submitted that Sarvesh Katheriya and Dinesh Katheriya are the two witnesses who have been interrogated during investigation and have stated that the applicant along with three other named accused persons drove the tractor on the deceased due to which he died. It is submitted that as such the applicant is named in the first information report and as such the bail application be rejected.

8. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the eye-witness account assigns the role of exhortation to the applicant along with two other accused persons whereas the role of driving the tractor on the deceased and murdering is assigned to Akash Kumar. The charge-sheet in the matter has been submitted. The role of the applicant thus is distinguishable with that of co-accused Akash.

9. 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.

10. Let the applicant- Ranvir Singh @ Banti, 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.

11. 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.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 22.5.2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri Vijay Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Suresh Dhar Dwivedi, 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- Ranvir Singh @ Banti, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 331 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 352, 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station Sirsaganj, District Firozabad.

4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 18.07.2024 by Kamal Kishore against the applicant, Akash Kumar, Ajay Kumar @ Manoj and Shivam Kumar alleging therein that his son Sarvesh Kumar was posted in the Home Guard department. Yesterday on 17.07.2024 he wanted his field to be ploughed for which he had a talk with Akash who was having a tractor for it being ploughed in the evening but when the tractor owner did not come for ploughing the field his son went to meet him and at that time Akash was ploughing the field of Sooraj Pal and then in the evening at about 7:30 pm the other accused persons including the applicant were present there and on some talks abused his son and caught-hold of him after which Akash drove the tractor many times on his son and thinking his son to be dead left him and ran away. On information the informant reached there and informed the police and with the help of an ambulance took his son to the District Hospital where doctors declared him dead. His son has been crushed by a tractor and has been murdered. A report be lodged and action be taken.

5. The postmortem examination of the deceased Sarvesh Kumar was conducted in which the doctor noted the following antemortem injuries:- "1. Abrasion over the left forearm on ant. surface size approx 4x3 cm present 4cm below left wrist joint.

2. On cut section - lacerated wound over the anterio-inferior surface size approx 6x3 cm in size." The cause of death was opined as due to shock & haemorrhage as a result of antemortem injuries. On probe the doctor found the liver and gall bladder to be lacerated and pale.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that Ramveer Singh has been interrogated as an eye-witness of the incident who states of the applicant, Ajay Kumar @ Manoj and Shivam Kumar exhorting co-accused Akash to run the tractor on the deceased and kill him after which co-accused Akash drove the tractor on the deceased Sarvesh Kumar and murdered him. It is submitted that as such the role of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co-accused Akash. It is submitted that even otherwise the medical examination of the deceased does not corroborate with the prosecution evidence in as much as the injuries as noted by the doctor being the antemortem injuries do not in any manner corroborate with the prosecution case as a perusal of the same would go to show they are not the injuries received by running of a tractor. It is submitted that the investigation in the matter has concluded and a charge-sheet has been submitted, copy of which is annexed as Annexure-SA-2 to the supplementary affidavit dated 04.04.2025. It is submitted that there is no independent witness to the incident. It is submitted that the applicant is having criminal history of two cases but in both the cases he is on bail, paragraph 2 and Annexure-SA-1 to the said supplementary affidavit being bail orders have been placed before the Court. The applicant is in jail since 14.08.2024.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the first informant submitted that Sarvesh Katheriya and Dinesh Katheriya are the two witnesses who have been interrogated during investigation and have stated that the applicant along with three other named accused persons drove the tractor on the deceased due to which he died. It is submitted that as such the applicant is named in the first information report and as such the bail application be rejected.

8. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the eye-witness account assigns the role of exhortation to the applicant along with two other accused persons whereas the role of driving the tractor on the deceased and murdering is assigned to Akash Kumar. The charge-sheet in the matter has been submitted. The role of the applicant thus is distinguishable with that of co-accused Akash.

9. 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.

10. Let the applicant- Ranvir Singh @ Banti, 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.

11. 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.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 22.5.2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad