High Court · 2025
Case Details
1-Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Rabindra Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. assisted by Ms. Pratiksha Rai, learned Brief Holder for the State of U.P. 2-By means of this bail application, applicant-Tanveer @ Pawwa, who is involved in Case Crime No. 821 of 2024, under Sections 109(1), 351(3), 118(1) B.N.S. and Sections 4/25 Arms Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahr seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial. 3-The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant-Zafar Alam has lodged an F.I.R. on 18.12.2024 against Tanveer, Zubair and Margoob for the offence under Sections 109 and 351(3) B.N.S., 2023 alleging inter-alia that at about 04:30 p.m., when his uncle namely Fahimuddin was returning home from his farm, the above named accused persons, with an intention to kill, attacked upon his uncle with a sharp knife. F.I.R. further alleges that when the complainant along with his brothers, namely, Waseem and Rameez tried to intervene to save his uncle, they ran away from the spot by giving threat. 4-It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the incident in question took place on 18.12.2024 at about 04:30 o'clock. Thereafter, the injured was brought to Babu Banarasi Das Government Hospital by police (HG No. 506 Dinesh) where he was medically examined on 18.12.2024 at 05:00 p.m., in which doctors have noted five incised wounds (I.W.) which were found at left side of the head, top of head, right side of skull, left side of face of the injured. It is next submitted that thereafter, the injured was got admitted on 18.12.2024 at 20:46 hours (08:46 p.m.) in Jai Prakash Narayan, Apex Trauma Center, AIIMS, New Delhi where following five visible injuries found on the body of the injured were noted: (i) Laceration 7x1 cm lacerated wound on left zygoma region. (ii) Laceration about 13 cm long superficial laceration left cheek extending till temple. (iii) Laceration 4 cm long on right frontal region, 9x1 cm long on vertex (iv) Laceration 7x1 cm on left parietal region. (v) Laceration 3 cm long right parietal region. Referring the NCCT Head and C Spine report, it is further submitted that in the said report, linear fractures with depressed fragments in left parietal bone was found but the same was not corroborated from the prosecution case. Much emphasis has been given by contending that there are discrepancies in the nature of initial injuries found on the body of the injured, as noted by the doctor of Babu Banarasi Das Government Hospital and the injuries noted by the doctor of AIIMS, New Delhi, hence, prosecution case is not liable to be believed. It is next submitted that the statement of the injured-Fahimuddin was recorded after about two months' wherein he has made false allegation against the applicant for causing injury with sharp edged weapon on his head and face. It is lastly submitted that in this case, charge-sheet has been submitted and statement of injured-Fahimuddin, before the trial court, was recorded, therefore, the applicant who is languishing in jail since 23.12.2024 is entitled to be released on bail. 5-Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the blood stained knife, which was used in the commission of crime, has been recovered on the pointing out of the applicant. In compliance of Section 105 of B.N.S.S.,2023, videography of the said recovery has also been made. Much emphasis has been given by contending that the statement of injured Fahimuddin was recorded before the trial court as PW-2 on 06.06.2025 in which he has made specific allegation inter-alia against the applicant Tanveer @ Pawwa that he had caused injuries to him with knife, which is also corroborated from the medical report. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. 6-Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that it is not in dispute that injured-Fahimuddin, in his statement recorded during investigation as well as during the trial court, has made clear allegation of assaulting him with knife against the applicant, which prima-facie corroborates from the medical report. So far as the submission of learned counsel for the applicant about the discripancies in the injury reports issued by two different hospitals are concerned, the same is a matter of trial which can be adjudicated by the trial court after recording the statement of the doctors concerned. Since the allegation of the prosecution and defence of the accused are still open to be urged before the trial court, therefore, this Court while considering the bail application of the applicant is neither examining the statement of injured/PW-2 meticulously nor recording any finding on merit so that the trial of the applicant may not be affected. 7-However, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the submissions advanced on behalf of parties, gravity of offence, role assigned to applicant, nature of injury, severity of punishment and statement of the injured/PW-2, I do not find any good ground to release the applicant on bail. 8-Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 9-The trial court is directed to make an endeavour to conclude the trial of the applicant expeditiously without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. 10-Superintendent of Police, Bulandshahr is directed to ensure the presence of all the remaining prosecution witnesses on the dates fixed before the trial court. 11-On appearance of the prosecution witnesses, the trial court shall record their statement on the same day and opportunity of cross-examination shall be given to the accused in continuation of their examination-in-chief. 12-Copy of this order be sent to the Superintendent of Police, Bulandshahr and concerned trial court for information and compliance. Order Date :- 23.8.2025 Saurabh SAURABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1-Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Rabindra Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. assisted by Ms. Pratiksha Rai, learned Brief Holder for the State of U.P. 2-By means of this bail application, applicant-Tanveer @ Pawwa, who is involved in Case Crime No. 821 of 2024, under Sections 109(1), 351(3), 118(1) B.N.S. and Sections 4/25 Arms Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahr seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial. 3-The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant-Zafar Alam has lodged an F.I.R. on 18.12.2024 against Tanveer, Zubair and Margoob for the offence under Sections 109 and 351(3) B.N.S., 2023 alleging inter-alia that at about 04:30 p.m., when his uncle namely Fahimuddin was returning home from his farm, the above named accused persons, with an intention to kill, attacked upon his uncle with a sharp knife. F.I.R. further alleges that when the complainant along with his brothers, namely, Waseem and Rameez tried to intervene to save his uncle, they ran away from the spot by giving threat. 4-It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the incident in question took place on 18.12.2024 at about 04:30 o'clock. Thereafter, the injured was brought to Babu Banarasi Das Government Hospital by police (HG No. 506 Dinesh) where he was medically examined on 18.12.2024 at 05:00 p.m., in which doctors have noted five incised wounds (I.W.) which were found at left side of the head, top of head, right side of skull, left side of face of the injured. It is next submitted that thereafter, the injured was got admitted on 18.12.2024 at 20:46 hours (08:46 p.m.) in Jai Prakash Narayan, Apex Trauma Center, AIIMS, New Delhi where following five visible injuries found on the body of the injured were noted: (i) Laceration 7x1 cm lacerated wound on left zygoma region. (ii) Laceration about 13 cm long superficial laceration left cheek extending till temple. (iii) Laceration 4 cm long on right frontal region, 9x1 cm long on vertex (iv) Laceration 7x1 cm on left parietal region. (v) Laceration 3 cm long right parietal region. Referring the NCCT Head and C Spine report, it is further submitted that in the said report, linear fractures with depressed fragments in left parietal bone was found but the same was not corroborated from the prosecution case. Much emphasis has been given by contending that there are discrepancies in the nature of initial injuries found on the body of the injured, as noted by the doctor of Babu Banarasi Das Government Hospital and the injuries noted by the doctor of AIIMS, New Delhi, hence, prosecution case is not liable to be believed. It is next submitted that the statement of the injured-Fahimuddin was recorded after about two months' wherein he has made false allegation against the applicant for causing injury with sharp edged weapon on his head and face. It is lastly submitted that in this case, charge-sheet has been submitted and statement of injured-Fahimuddin, before the trial court, was recorded, therefore, the applicant who is languishing in jail since 23.12.2024 is entitled to be released on bail. 5-Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the blood stained knife, which was used in the commission of crime, has been recovered on the pointing out of the applicant. In compliance of Section 105 of B.N.S.S.,2023, videography of the said recovery has also been made. Much emphasis has been given by contending that the statement of injured Fahimuddin was recorded before the trial court as PW-2 on 06.06.2025 in which he has made specific allegation inter-alia against the applicant Tanveer @ Pawwa that he had caused injuries to him with knife, which is also corroborated from the medical report. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. 6-Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that it is not in dispute that injured-Fahimuddin, in his statement recorded during investigation as well as during the trial court, has made clear allegation of assaulting him with knife against the applicant, which prima-facie corroborates from the medical report. So far as the submission of learned counsel for the applicant about the discripancies in the injury reports issued by two different hospitals are concerned, the same is a matter of trial which can be adjudicated by the trial court after recording the statement of the doctors concerned. Since the allegation of the prosecution and defence of the accused are still open to be urged before the trial court, therefore, this Court while considering the bail application of the applicant is neither examining the statement of injured/PW-2 meticulously nor recording any finding on merit so that the trial of the applicant may not be affected. 7-However, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the submissions advanced on behalf of parties, gravity of offence, role assigned to applicant, nature of injury, severity of punishment and statement of the injured/PW-2, I do not find any good ground to release the applicant on bail. 8-Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 9-The trial court is directed to make an endeavour to conclude the trial of the applicant expeditiously without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. 10-Superintendent of Police, Bulandshahr is directed to ensure the presence of all the remaining prosecution witnesses on the dates fixed before the trial court. 11-On appearance of the prosecution witnesses, the trial court shall record their statement on the same day and opportunity of cross-examination shall be given to the accused in continuation of their examination-in-chief. 12-Copy of this order be sent to the Superintendent of Police, Bulandshahr and concerned trial court for information and compliance. Order Date :- 23.8.2025 Saurabh SAURABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad