State of U.P v. Party

Srivastava, G.A. Court No. - 64

1. List revised. HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

2. Heard Sri Abhishek Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ambleshwar Pandey, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

3. Vakalatnama of Sri Ambleshwar Pandey, learned counsel for the first informant is not on record despite his name being printed in the cause list. Office to trace out the same and place it on record and make a note in the order sheet regarding the same.

4. This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the applicant-Ravindra @ Bhuri Singh, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.49 of 2025, u/s 103(1), 61(2) of BNS, 2023, P.S. Naarkhi, District Firozabad.

5. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 4.3.2025 by Raghuraj Singh against the applicant and two other persons alleging therein that on 3.3.2025, his son Pushpendra had gone to the cold- storage with potato. He was returning with Ravindra @ Bhuri 2 BAIL No. 25827 of 2025 Singh on a tractor wherein the co-accused Pradeep and Manoj and the driver of the tractor Bhuri Singh crushed him to death by the tractor. He and his son Rahul reached the place of occurrence and on seeing them, the accused persons ran away. He informed police on 112. The accused persons have enmity with them due to an old land dispute. The incident is of 3.3.2025 at about 10 p.m. A report be lodged and action be taken.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that although the applicant is named in the FIR but he has been named on account of suspicion only. It is further argued that there is no eye-witness of the incident. The incident is of night and there was no source of light present at the place of incident. It is further argued that there is no specific allegation against the applicant but general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant and two other co-accused persons. It is further argued that the investigation in the matter has concluded and charge sheet has been submitted in which although the police has shown Rahul Yadav, Basdev Singh and Pradeep Kumar as witness of the incident who reached after the incident. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 30 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 8.3.2025.

7. Per contra learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the first informant submits that the deceased was found to have received five injuries on his body and cause of death was opined by the doctor as shock and haemorrhage due to head injury. The applicant is named in the FIR. Learned counsels do not dispute the fact that there is no eye-witness of the incident.

8. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that there is no eye-witness of the incident. The incident is of night hours. The implication of the applicant in the matter is on account of suspicion only.

9. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to 3 BAIL No. 25827 of 2025 indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

10. Let the applicant-Ravindra @ Bhuri Singh, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she/he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her/him presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her/him, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS,

2023. (v) 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 351 BNSS,

2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for 4 BAIL No. 25827 of 2025 the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her/him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against her/him under Section 269 BNS, 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

11. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. September 24, 2025 Gaurav Kuls (Samit Gopal,J.) GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Srivastava, G.A. Court No. - 64

1. List revised. HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

2. Heard Sri Abhishek Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ambleshwar Pandey, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

3. Vakalatnama of Sri Ambleshwar Pandey, learned counsel for the first informant is not on record despite his name being printed in the cause list. Office to trace out the same and place it on record and make a note in the order sheet regarding the same.

4. This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the applicant-Ravindra @ Bhuri Singh, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.49 of 2025, u/s 103(1), 61(2) of BNS, 2023, P.S. Naarkhi, District Firozabad.

5. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 4.3.2025 by Raghuraj Singh against the applicant and two other persons alleging therein that on 3.3.2025, his son Pushpendra had gone to the cold- storage with potato. He was returning with Ravindra @ Bhuri 2 BAIL No. 25827 of 2025 Singh on a tractor wherein the co-accused Pradeep and Manoj and the driver of the tractor Bhuri Singh crushed him to death by the tractor. He and his son Rahul reached the place of occurrence and on seeing them, the accused persons ran away. He informed police on 112. The accused persons have enmity with them due to an old land dispute. The incident is of 3.3.2025 at about 10 p.m. A report be lodged and action be taken.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that although the applicant is named in the FIR but he has been named on account of suspicion only. It is further argued that there is no eye-witness of the incident. The incident is of night and there was no source of light present at the place of incident. It is further argued that there is no specific allegation against the applicant but general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant and two other co-accused persons. It is further argued that the investigation in the matter has concluded and charge sheet has been submitted in which although the police has shown Rahul Yadav, Basdev Singh and Pradeep Kumar as witness of the incident who reached after the incident. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 30 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 8.3.2025.

7. Per contra learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the first informant submits that the deceased was found to have received five injuries on his body and cause of death was opined by the doctor as shock and haemorrhage due to head injury. The applicant is named in the FIR. Learned counsels do not dispute the fact that there is no eye-witness of the incident.

8. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that there is no eye-witness of the incident. The incident is of night hours. The implication of the applicant in the matter is on account of suspicion only.

9. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to 3 BAIL No. 25827 of 2025 indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

10. Let the applicant-Ravindra @ Bhuri Singh, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she/he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her/him presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her/him, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS,

2023. (v) 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 351 BNSS,

2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for 4 BAIL No. 25827 of 2025 the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her/him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against her/him under Section 269 BNS, 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

11. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. September 24, 2025 Gaurav Kuls (Samit Gopal,J.) GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad