High Court · 2025

Akhilesh Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Manav Chaurasiya, learned AGA for the State-respondent and Shri Radha Mohan Pandey, learned counsel for the informant.

3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.200 of 2024, under Section 103(1) B.N.S., 2023, Police Station- Vindhyanchal, District- Mirzapur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on the basis of general, omnibus and false allegation, applicant has been roped in the present matter alongwith five others including co-accused Ramashankar Saroj and Vikas Dubey and after considering the entire facts of the case in detail, co-accused Ramashankar Saroj and Vikas Dubey have been released on bail by this Court and bail order of co-accused Ramashankar Saroj has been annexed as Annexure No.9 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant bail application. He next submits, co-accused Vikas Dubey has been released on bail on 22.04.2025 vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.9908 of 2025. He further submits, as far as allegation of assault is concerned, case of applicant is at par with them.

5. He further submits that however, as per prosecution when applicant and two others were arrested then from their pointing out from a room, which was in possession of the applicant, weapons used in the crime were recovered but entire recovery is false and planted one.

6. He further submits that however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of one another case but that case relates to minor offences. He next submits, howver, in that case applicant was convicted for three years but in that case during pendency of his appeal, he has been released on bail.

7. He further submits that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 13.10.2024 i.e. for last more than six months.

8. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant however opposed the prayer for bail and submit that applicant and others made assault due to which deceased died but they could not dispute the fact that co-accused Ramashankar Saroj and Vikas Dubey have already been released on bail and as far as allegation of assault is concerned, case of applicant is at par with them.

9. They however, further submit that case of applicant is distinguishable from them, as from the room of the applicant alleged weapons, which were used in the crime, were recovered but they could not dispute the fact that on the joint pointing out of the applicant and co-accused Vijay Tiwari and Vikas Dubey alleged recovery was made and even co-accused Vikas Dubey has already been released on bail.

10. They however further submit that apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of two other cases and applicant has explained criminal history of only one case in the instant bail application but they fairly conceded, unexplained case relates to minor offences.

11. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case.

12. However, as per allegation, due to the assault made by applicant and others deceased died but it reflects, only general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against all the accused including co-accused Ramashankar Saroj and Vikas Dubey and both the above co-accused have been released on bail.

13. Further, however, as per prosecution, from the room of the applicant, on the joint pointing out of applicant and co-accused co- accused Vijay Tiwari and Vikas Dubey alleged weapons used in the crime were recovered but co-accused Vikas Dubey has already been released on bail.

14. Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of two other cases and applicant has explained criminal history of only one case in the instant bail application but unexplained case relates to minor offences.

15. Further, it reflects, however, in the explained case, applicant has been convicted for three years but that case relates to minor offences and in that case, he has been released on bail during pendency of his appeal.

16. Further, applicant is in jail in the present matter since

13.10.2024 i.e. for last more than six months.

17. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

18. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

19. Let the applicant- Ayodhya Tiwari, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

20. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

21. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 7.5.2025 Zafar MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Akhilesh Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Manav Chaurasiya, learned AGA for the State-respondent and Shri Radha Mohan Pandey, learned counsel for the informant.

3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.200 of 2024, under Section 103(1) B.N.S., 2023, Police Station- Vindhyanchal, District- Mirzapur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on the basis of general, omnibus and false allegation, applicant has been roped in the present matter alongwith five others including co-accused Ramashankar Saroj and Vikas Dubey and after considering the entire facts of the case in detail, co-accused Ramashankar Saroj and Vikas Dubey have been released on bail by this Court and bail order of co-accused Ramashankar Saroj has been annexed as Annexure No.9 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant bail application. He next submits, co-accused Vikas Dubey has been released on bail on 22.04.2025 vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.9908 of 2025. He further submits, as far as allegation of assault is concerned, case of applicant is at par with them.

5. He further submits that however, as per prosecution when applicant and two others were arrested then from their pointing out from a room, which was in possession of the applicant, weapons used in the crime were recovered but entire recovery is false and planted one.

6. He further submits that however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of one another case but that case relates to minor offences. He next submits, howver, in that case applicant was convicted for three years but in that case during pendency of his appeal, he has been released on bail.

7. He further submits that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 13.10.2024 i.e. for last more than six months.

8. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant however opposed the prayer for bail and submit that applicant and others made assault due to which deceased died but they could not dispute the fact that co-accused Ramashankar Saroj and Vikas Dubey have already been released on bail and as far as allegation of assault is concerned, case of applicant is at par with them.

9. They however, further submit that case of applicant is distinguishable from them, as from the room of the applicant alleged weapons, which were used in the crime, were recovered but they could not dispute the fact that on the joint pointing out of the applicant and co-accused Vijay Tiwari and Vikas Dubey alleged recovery was made and even co-accused Vikas Dubey has already been released on bail.

10. They however further submit that apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of two other cases and applicant has explained criminal history of only one case in the instant bail application but they fairly conceded, unexplained case relates to minor offences.

11. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case.

12. However, as per allegation, due to the assault made by applicant and others deceased died but it reflects, only general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against all the accused including co-accused Ramashankar Saroj and Vikas Dubey and both the above co-accused have been released on bail.

13. Further, however, as per prosecution, from the room of the applicant, on the joint pointing out of applicant and co-accused co- accused Vijay Tiwari and Vikas Dubey alleged weapons used in the crime were recovered but co-accused Vikas Dubey has already been released on bail.

14. Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of two other cases and applicant has explained criminal history of only one case in the instant bail application but unexplained case relates to minor offences.

15. Further, it reflects, however, in the explained case, applicant has been convicted for three years but that case relates to minor offences and in that case, he has been released on bail during pendency of his appeal.

16. Further, applicant is in jail in the present matter since

13.10.2024 i.e. for last more than six months.

17. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

18. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

19. Let the applicant- Ayodhya Tiwari, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

20. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

21. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 7.5.2025 Zafar MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad