High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 66 Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:110007 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21738 of 2024 Applicant :- Nikhil Bharti Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arjun Kumar Gautam,Narendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Satyawan Yadav,Surya Ditya Yadav
Legal Reasoning
Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Narendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned AGA, Sri I.P. Singh, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. at the instance of the applicant Nikhil Bharti has been filed seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 96 of 2024, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Sidhari, District Azamgarh, during the pendency of the trial before the court below. The bail application of the applicant in the court below was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Azamgarh, vide order dated 16.04.2024. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.03.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number for ulterior motives. 4. As per the prosecution case set up in the FIR dated 21.03.2024 giving rise to the present case crime number it is alleged by the informant Kiran W/o Pankaj Kumar that on 21.03.2024 the named accused Guddu Bharti came to her house and took away her husband to his house where the applicant Nikhil Bharti, Guddu Bharti, Bansh Bahadur, Jang Bahadur, Suraj and Gulabi were already present armed with Kulhari (axe), Phawara, Iron Rod and other sharp edged weapons. The said persons began to assault her husband as informed by the villagers, who had seen the incident. The informant, her sister-in-law Kavita and her mother-in-law Shanti Devi as also other villagers intervened to stop the scuffle but the named accused persons began abusing the first informant and others and before the eyes of the informant done to death the husband of the informant. 5. It is argued that the eyewitness to the incident have not been shown in the site plan prepared and the statements recorded of the witnesses are inconsistent which is indicative of the fact that the said witnesses are not present at the place of occurrence and have not seen the incident. In her statement the first informant has nominated the applicant with Kulhari (axe). The sister-in-law of the deceased Kavita in her statement recorded as P.W. 2 has also nominated the applicant with Kulhari (axe). The Mother-in-law in her statement recorded as P.W. 3 has also nominated the applicant with Kulhari (axe). Learned counsel for the applicant has invited the attention of the Court to the post mortem of the deceased particularly to the ante -mortem injuries recorded which are being reproduced hereunder:- i. Lacerated wound of size 04cm x 02cm x bone deep present over the midlying eyebrow forehead. ii. Crushed lacerated wound of size 12cm x 06cm into brain cavity deep present over the left side occipital region, 05cm back side of left ear with under lying bone fracture. iii. Contusion of size 10cm x 04cm just right side scapula. iv. Abrasion of size 05cm x 03cm present over the left side top of shoulder. 6. It is argued that the ante-mortem injuries 1 and 2 recorded over the body of the deceased could not have been caused by Kulhari (axe) assigned to the applicant. The recovery of Kulhari from the pointing out of the applicant is of no consequence. The criminal antecedents of the applicant has been duly explained in the supplementary affidavit dated 01.07.2024. It is further submitted that the applicant undertakes to cooperate with the trial and shall not misuse the liberty of bail if enlarged on bail during the trial. Hence prayer for bail has been mad. 7. Per contra, learned AGA as also learned counsel for the first informant have opposed the bail plea by submitting that the applicant has been accused of causing the death of the deceased by beating him with an Kulhari (axe) along with other co-accused persons. The blood stained Kulhari has also been recovered from the pointing out of the applicant. The Forensic Science Laboratory has found human blood stains over it. The testimony of the eyewitness, namely, Smt. Kiran (First Informant and wife of the deceased), Smt. Shanti Devi (mother of the deceased) and Kavita (sister-in-law of the deceased) are not liable to be disbelieved. The incident stands corroborated by the statement of the independent witnesses Kailash Nath Ram and Mahendra Kumar Gupta. Accordingly, it is submitted that the bail application warrants rejection. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material on record, this Court finds that in the FIR general allegation have been made against the applicant and no weapon has been assigned to him. In the statement recorded during investigation under Section 161 Cr.P.C.and as P.W.1, P.W. 2 and P.W. 3 the eye witnesses have assigned Kulhari (Axe) to the applicant. An axe is a sharp edged weapon. An axe when used with its sharp edged typically causes incised wounds or cut wounds. However, contused lacerated wounds can be caused by an axe when used by the blunt side. Prima facie the ante mortem injuries resulting in the death of the deceased cannot be said to have been caused by Kulhari (Axe). The applicant is not the only assailant. Some of the named accused persons have been alleged to be armed with iron rod, Phawra (spade), if used from its blunt side, which can cause lacerated and crushed lacerated injuries as noticed over the body of the deceased. At this stage, in the opinion of the Court it is a fit case to grant bail to the applicant. 9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 10. Let the accused-applicant, Nikhil Bharti involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence. ii. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity. iii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial. iv. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. 11. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. 12. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 2.7.2025 v.k.updh. Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad