High Court · 2025

Applicant :- Love Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.

1. Instant application has been filed by the applicant under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for seeking bail in Case Crime No. 472 of 2024 for offences punishable under sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 333, 115(2), 109 and 352 of BNS, Police Station - Bewar, District - Mainpuri, during pendency of the trial.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submitted that applicant is a innocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He has been falsely implicated in the said case due to the dispute between the parties. It is submitted that as per the confessional statement of the injured person-Dhruv, which is at page No. 28 of the bail application, the role assigned to the present applicant is only to instigate the other co-accused for making a fire on the injured peron. He is charged under Section 120-B along with other charges. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submitted that there are no other material on record to connect the applicant for role of instigation to the co- accused person. It is also submitted that it is wrong to say that there were any mens rea or intent available for commission of the offence as alleged in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that the applicant is a person of clean antecedents and there is no previous criminal history against the applicant. The injured person and the applicant belong to same village. The applicant has been falsely implicated due to enmity and dispute with the informant. It is also undertaken that applicant will abide with all the terms and conditions imposed by this Court while granting the bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 31.12.2024 i.e. for about four months. Counsel for the applicant further submitted that investigation has already been completed and charge sheet has been filed on 18.02.2025 and the concerned court has taken cognizance on 10.03.2025 and charges have also been framed on 15.03.2025. It is submitted that there are no chance for completion of trial in near future. In view of these facts, the applicant may be released on bail.

3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of State vehemently opposed the instant bail application and contended that there are specific allegations against the applicant for instigating the co-accused and to make fire on the injured person and due to that instigation, the co-accused opened fire on the injured person and the person sustained a pellet injury on the chest i.e. vital part of the body. But he has also fairly conceded that the injured person had already been discharged from the hospital after some days of treatment. It is also admitted fact that there is no previous criminal history of the present applicant and charge sheet has already been filed. Learned A.G.A. vehemently submitted that in view of the facts and circumstances, the applicant is charged for serious offence and he is not entitled for concession by this Court while granting the bail.

4. Learned counsel for the complainant has also vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that there is specific case against the applicant that since there is some dispute between the informant and the applicant therefore, he has instigated the co- accused to open fire on the injured person and due to that he sustained injury on vital part of the body but he has not contradicted the fact that there is no criminal history against the applicant. He further submitted that there are materials on record to connect the applicant with the crime as alleged in the F.I.R.

5. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel for the complainant. It is admitted fact that Deepu is a main co-accused person, who was assigned the role of causing fire arm injury to the injured person on chest, which is a vital party of the body. The present applicant has no role in causing injury to the injured person. His role is only to instigate the co-accused person to open the fire on the injured person and is distinguishable from the role of main co-accused-Deepu. Applicant has been only assigned the role of instigation as per the statement given by the complainant, that on instigation of applicant, Deepu made a fire on the injured person.

6. It is also admitted fact that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant. He is a person of clean antecedents. I have also taken into consideration that the applicant has undertaken to abide with all terms and conditions imposed by this Court while granting the bail. There are no other material, I found to connect the applicant with the instant offence except the statement of complainant/ informant and charge sheet has already been filed and the cognizance has been taken. There is no chance of completion of trial in near future.

7. Taking into consideration, the aforesaid reasons, nature of offence, nature of allegations against the accused person and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

8. Let the applicant- Love Pratap Singh who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) 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 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. 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.

9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 21.4.2025 Nitika Sri. NITIKA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Applicant :- Love Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.

1. Instant application has been filed by the applicant under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for seeking bail in Case Crime No. 472 of 2024 for offences punishable under sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 333, 115(2), 109 and 352 of BNS, Police Station - Bewar, District - Mainpuri, during pendency of the trial.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submitted that applicant is a innocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He has been falsely implicated in the said case due to the dispute between the parties. It is submitted that as per the confessional statement of the injured person-Dhruv, which is at page No. 28 of the bail application, the role assigned to the present applicant is only to instigate the other co-accused for making a fire on the injured peron. He is charged under Section 120-B along with other charges. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submitted that there are no other material on record to connect the applicant for role of instigation to the co- accused person. It is also submitted that it is wrong to say that there were any mens rea or intent available for commission of the offence as alleged in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that the applicant is a person of clean antecedents and there is no previous criminal history against the applicant. The injured person and the applicant belong to same village. The applicant has been falsely implicated due to enmity and dispute with the informant. It is also undertaken that applicant will abide with all the terms and conditions imposed by this Court while granting the bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 31.12.2024 i.e. for about four months. Counsel for the applicant further submitted that investigation has already been completed and charge sheet has been filed on 18.02.2025 and the concerned court has taken cognizance on 10.03.2025 and charges have also been framed on 15.03.2025. It is submitted that there are no chance for completion of trial in near future. In view of these facts, the applicant may be released on bail.

3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of State vehemently opposed the instant bail application and contended that there are specific allegations against the applicant for instigating the co-accused and to make fire on the injured person and due to that instigation, the co-accused opened fire on the injured person and the person sustained a pellet injury on the chest i.e. vital part of the body. But he has also fairly conceded that the injured person had already been discharged from the hospital after some days of treatment. It is also admitted fact that there is no previous criminal history of the present applicant and charge sheet has already been filed. Learned A.G.A. vehemently submitted that in view of the facts and circumstances, the applicant is charged for serious offence and he is not entitled for concession by this Court while granting the bail.

4. Learned counsel for the complainant has also vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that there is specific case against the applicant that since there is some dispute between the informant and the applicant therefore, he has instigated the co- accused to open fire on the injured person and due to that he sustained injury on vital part of the body but he has not contradicted the fact that there is no criminal history against the applicant. He further submitted that there are materials on record to connect the applicant with the crime as alleged in the F.I.R.

5. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel for the complainant. It is admitted fact that Deepu is a main co-accused person, who was assigned the role of causing fire arm injury to the injured person on chest, which is a vital party of the body. The present applicant has no role in causing injury to the injured person. His role is only to instigate the co-accused person to open the fire on the injured person and is distinguishable from the role of main co-accused-Deepu. Applicant has been only assigned the role of instigation as per the statement given by the complainant, that on instigation of applicant, Deepu made a fire on the injured person.

6. It is also admitted fact that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant. He is a person of clean antecedents. I have also taken into consideration that the applicant has undertaken to abide with all terms and conditions imposed by this Court while granting the bail. There are no other material, I found to connect the applicant with the instant offence except the statement of complainant/ informant and charge sheet has already been filed and the cognizance has been taken. There is no chance of completion of trial in near future.

7. Taking into consideration, the aforesaid reasons, nature of offence, nature of allegations against the accused person and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

8. Let the applicant- Love Pratap Singh who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) 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 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. 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.

9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 21.4.2025 Nitika Sri. NITIKA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad