High Court · 2025

Applicant :- Bal Govind Tripathi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Srivastava,Indra Jit Singh,Priyanka Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.C.Tiwari(Ac),Akhilesh Kumar Tripathi,G.A.,Ray Sahab Yadav,Vinay Kumar Tripathi Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

1. Heard Mr. Om Prakash Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Indra Jit Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and Mr. Bishram Tiwari as well as Mr. Ray Sahab Yadav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of injured- Manish Tiwari.

2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 84 of 2025, under Sections 121(2), 132, 125, 221, 109(1), 45 B.N.S., Police Station Tharwai, District Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial.

3. As per the prosecution case, in brief, Sub Inspector Amit Kumar Chaubey, got a first information report lodged on 10.04.2025 against applicant-Bal Govind Tripathi and his son Ankit Tripathi making allegations inter alia that there was a dispute between two parties namely Bal Govind Tripathi and Manish Tiwari. Both the parties had come to get their reports registered and were writing their complaints. The complainant was sitting and interrogating one party, then on the exhortation of Bal Govind Tripathi, co- accused Ankit Tripathi picked up a brick from nearby and hit Manish Tiwari on his head, which after hitting Manish Tiwari also hit his forehead above his left eye.

4. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The incident has not taken place in the manner as alleged by the prosecution. Much emphasis has been given by contending that role of only exhortation has been assigned to the applicant whereas role of assault to Manish Tiwari with brick has been attributed to co-accused Ankit Tripathi. So far as criminal history of the applicant is concerned, it is pointed out that applicant has criminal history of three cases being Case Crime No. 364 of 2022, under Sections 427, 5041, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Tharwai, District Prayagraj, in which as on date applicant is not on bail, Case Crime No. 322 of 2023, under Sections 323, 354(b), 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Tharwai, District Prayagraj, in which final/closure report No. 53/2023 dated 11.12.2023 has been submitted in favour of the applicant and Case Crime No. 1055 of 2023, under Section 135-1(a) Electricity Act, Police Station Anti-power, Prayagraj, which is a compoundable offence, in which applicant has deposited the penalty, hence the said case has come to an end. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.04.2025 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case.

5. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as learned counsel for the injured-Manish opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the applicant is man of criminal nature. The incident took place in police station and on the instance of applicant, co-accused Ankit Tripathi who is his son assaulted Manish Kumar with brick which also hit the complainant. The complainant has received one injury in the nature of lacerated wound on his left eyebrow, which is simple in nature and in X-Ray report no abnormality has been detected. Injured-Manish has received five injuries out of which three injuries are in the nature of abrasion and two injuries are in the nature of contusion. Lastly, it is submitted that bail application of the applicant is liable to be dismissed.

6. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find that there is no allegation of causing injury against the applicant, which has been attributed to co-accused Ankit Tripathi as noted above, hence the case of present distinguishable from that of co-accused Ankit Tripathi. Govind Tripathi applicant-Bal

7. Considering the over all facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused- applicant, role attributed to applicant and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that prima facie the applicant has made out a case for bail.

8. Hence, the bail application of applicant is hereby allowed.

9. Let the applicant-Bal Govind Tripathi, 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: (i) That the applicant shall cooperate with the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (ii) That applicant shall not seek any adjournment before the trial Court. (iii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. (v) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail.

10. In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, it will be open for the complainant and injured to move bail cancellation application before the Court concerned.

11. It is made clear that the observations contained in the instant order are confined to the issue of bail only and shall not affect the merit of the trial.

12. It is made clear that parity of this bail order shall not be extended to co-accused-Ankit Tripathi. Order Date :- 19.8.2025 Kashifa KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Applicant :- Bal Govind Tripathi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Srivastava,Indra Jit Singh,Priyanka Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.C.Tiwari(Ac),Akhilesh Kumar Tripathi,G.A.,Ray Sahab Yadav,Vinay Kumar Tripathi Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

1. Heard Mr. Om Prakash Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Indra Jit Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and Mr. Bishram Tiwari as well as Mr. Ray Sahab Yadav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of injured- Manish Tiwari.

2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 84 of 2025, under Sections 121(2), 132, 125, 221, 109(1), 45 B.N.S., Police Station Tharwai, District Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial.

3. As per the prosecution case, in brief, Sub Inspector Amit Kumar Chaubey, got a first information report lodged on 10.04.2025 against applicant-Bal Govind Tripathi and his son Ankit Tripathi making allegations inter alia that there was a dispute between two parties namely Bal Govind Tripathi and Manish Tiwari. Both the parties had come to get their reports registered and were writing their complaints. The complainant was sitting and interrogating one party, then on the exhortation of Bal Govind Tripathi, co- accused Ankit Tripathi picked up a brick from nearby and hit Manish Tiwari on his head, which after hitting Manish Tiwari also hit his forehead above his left eye.

4. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The incident has not taken place in the manner as alleged by the prosecution. Much emphasis has been given by contending that role of only exhortation has been assigned to the applicant whereas role of assault to Manish Tiwari with brick has been attributed to co-accused Ankit Tripathi. So far as criminal history of the applicant is concerned, it is pointed out that applicant has criminal history of three cases being Case Crime No. 364 of 2022, under Sections 427, 5041, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Tharwai, District Prayagraj, in which as on date applicant is not on bail, Case Crime No. 322 of 2023, under Sections 323, 354(b), 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Tharwai, District Prayagraj, in which final/closure report No. 53/2023 dated 11.12.2023 has been submitted in favour of the applicant and Case Crime No. 1055 of 2023, under Section 135-1(a) Electricity Act, Police Station Anti-power, Prayagraj, which is a compoundable offence, in which applicant has deposited the penalty, hence the said case has come to an end. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.04.2025 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case.

5. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as learned counsel for the injured-Manish opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the applicant is man of criminal nature. The incident took place in police station and on the instance of applicant, co-accused Ankit Tripathi who is his son assaulted Manish Kumar with brick which also hit the complainant. The complainant has received one injury in the nature of lacerated wound on his left eyebrow, which is simple in nature and in X-Ray report no abnormality has been detected. Injured-Manish has received five injuries out of which three injuries are in the nature of abrasion and two injuries are in the nature of contusion. Lastly, it is submitted that bail application of the applicant is liable to be dismissed.

6. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find that there is no allegation of causing injury against the applicant, which has been attributed to co-accused Ankit Tripathi as noted above, hence the case of present distinguishable from that of co-accused Ankit Tripathi. Govind Tripathi applicant-Bal

7. Considering the over all facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused- applicant, role attributed to applicant and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that prima facie the applicant has made out a case for bail.

8. Hence, the bail application of applicant is hereby allowed.

9. Let the applicant-Bal Govind Tripathi, 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: (i) That the applicant shall cooperate with the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (ii) That applicant shall not seek any adjournment before the trial Court. (iii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. (v) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail.

10. In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, it will be open for the complainant and injured to move bail cancellation application before the Court concerned.

11. It is made clear that the observations contained in the instant order are confined to the issue of bail only and shall not affect the merit of the trial.

12. It is made clear that parity of this bail order shall not be extended to co-accused-Ankit Tripathi. Order Date :- 19.8.2025 Kashifa KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad