Vijay Verma And Another v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

1. Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State are present.

2. None apppeared for the opposite party no. 2.

3. This Court by order dated 09.09.2025 has made observation that the case would not be adjourned on account of non- appearance of opposite party no.2. The relevant paragraph is reiterated underneath: "It is made clear that on the next dates fixed in this case, the case would not be adjourned on account of non- appearance of private opposite party No. 2 and it would be heard and decided on merits."

5. Learned counsel for the accused-appellants submits that accused-appellants have been falsely implicated by the opposite party no.2. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that there was an altercation between the parties on playing of Disc Jockey (DJ) in the marriage party on 16.11.2024. Subsequent to the altercation, the accused resorted to wielding of Bamboo pole on the victims Vishal (injured), Indrapreet and Pawan Deep (died). It is further submitted that the deceased have left the place of occurrence from motorcycle and slipped. It is to due the motorcycle accident that the two have suffered injuries and have succumbed to those injuries while taking to the hospital. Learned counsel has further 2 CRLA No. 518 of 2025 drawn the attention of this Court towards the contents of the F.I.R. that despite the matter being of night of 16.11.2024, eight persons have been falsely implicated on 17.11.2024 at 13:18 hours. The injuries on the person of the two deceased, namely, Indrapreet Singh and Pawan Deep are suffered on one side. Indrapreet suffered four ante-mortem injuries and died due to shock and hemorrhage. Pawan Deep suffered two injuries and died due to shock and hemorrhage. He further submits that Indrapreet was riding motorcycle whereas the other deceased was a pillion rider. He is derived the inference from the statement of victim (injured-Vishal) that the motorcycle slipped. Further argument that 9 persons had beaten the three by kicks and fists and have also taken out the bamboo pole from the field and wielded it, not commensurate to the weapon used and persons involved. Further submits that there is no role attributed separately on the accused-persons. He further submits that the provisions of SC/ST Act also does not attract, as no caste related words have been used by the accused-appellants and it is merely the use of (DJ) music, which was the motive behind the altercation. Further submits that despite the F.I.R. being delayed, it was registered for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. After investigation the Investigating Officer has submitted the charge-sheet for the offence of murder, which does not attract in the present case, hence, quashing of bail rejection order dated

07.01.2025 passed by Exclusive Court of SC/ST Act (Special Judge SC/ST Act) in Bail Application No.3833 of 2024 (Vijay Verma and another Versus State of U.P. and another) arising out of Case Crime No.478 of 2024 under Sections 191(1), 191(2), 191(3), 103(2), 352, 351(3) of B.N.S. and 3(1) Da,3(1)Dha, 3(2) Va of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Lalganj, District Pratapgarh.

6. Learned A.G.A. has submitted that statement of injured witness cannot be ignored. The injured witness in his statement has made specific mention about roles of the accused. The mere mention that the victims while driving the motorcycle slipped and suffered injuries will not be inferred that the injuries have been suffered by the deceased due to accident, when statements of other witnesses clearly shows the name of the accused-appellants 3 CRLA No. 518 of 2025 along with other co-accused. Further submits that the delay in lodging the F.I.R. does not reap any benefit for the accused- appellants. The matter is of double murder. He further submits that there is recovery of bamboo poles from the accused, which were used in the crime. He, therefore, opposed the contention raised by learned counsel for the appellants.

7. There is no one from the side of opposite party no.2 to counter the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the appellants.

8. This Court has taken into consideration rival submissions made by the parties and perused the record.

9. Prima facie, the F.I.R. is lodged with delay as the occurrence which is shown in the F.I.R. is of 22:15 hours of 16.11.2024 and the F.I.R. has been registered on 17.11.2024 at 13:18 hours at the Police Station Lalganj, Pratapgarh, which is situated merely four kms away from the place of incident. It is averred in the F.I.R. that there was an altercation between the accused and deceased as well as injured while playing of DJ at the time of Dwarpooja; the informant along with family members came to join the marriage party. The role of accused is mentioned in the F.I.R. which is similar that of all the accused that they have beaten the injured and the deceased with kicks and fists. The weapon used are bamboo poles fixed on the boundary of agricultural field. The deceased Indrapreet suffered four injuries on his face and head. The parietal bone was fractured. One injury sustained by the deceased Pawan Deep is on the head with fracture of occipital bone whereas multiple abrasions of knee was seen. The matter apparently seems to be of altercation between the parties on playing of DJ in the night, which is the case of the prosecution. The charge-sheet is submitted. The accused-appellants are languishing in jail since 18.11.2024. Moreover, by order dated

14.10.2025 passed by this Court the current status of trial has been summoned, which is still awaited. This Court, therefore, is of the view that the appeal is liable to be allowed.

10. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.

11. The order dated 07.01.2025, passed by Special Judge, SC/ST 4 CRLA No. 518 of 2025 (Prevention of atrocities) Act, Pratapgarh in Bail Application No.3833 of 2024 (Vijay Verma and another Versus State of U.P. and another) arising out of Case Crime No.478 of 2024 under Sections 191(1), 191(2), 191(3), 103(2), 352, 351(3) of B.N.S. and 3(1) Da,3(1)Dha, 3(2) Va of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Lalganj, District Pratapgarh, is set aside.

12. The appellants, Vijay Verma and Rahul Verma involved in Case Crime No.478 of 2024 under Sections 191(1), 191(2), 191(3), 103(2), 352, 351(3) of B.N.S. and 3(1) Da,3(1)Dha, 3(2) Va of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Lalganj, District Pratapgarh shall be released on each of them furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned. December 1, 2025 MN/- (Avnish Saxena,J.) MAHENDRA NATH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State are present.

2. None apppeared for the opposite party no. 2.

3. This Court by order dated 09.09.2025 has made observation that the case would not be adjourned on account of non- appearance of opposite party no.2. The relevant paragraph is reiterated underneath: "It is made clear that on the next dates fixed in this case, the case would not be adjourned on account of non- appearance of private opposite party No. 2 and it would be heard and decided on merits."

5. Learned counsel for the accused-appellants submits that accused-appellants have been falsely implicated by the opposite party no.2. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that there was an altercation between the parties on playing of Disc Jockey (DJ) in the marriage party on 16.11.2024. Subsequent to the altercation, the accused resorted to wielding of Bamboo pole on the victims Vishal (injured), Indrapreet and Pawan Deep (died). It is further submitted that the deceased have left the place of occurrence from motorcycle and slipped. It is to due the motorcycle accident that the two have suffered injuries and have succumbed to those injuries while taking to the hospital. Learned counsel has further 2 CRLA No. 518 of 2025 drawn the attention of this Court towards the contents of the F.I.R. that despite the matter being of night of 16.11.2024, eight persons have been falsely implicated on 17.11.2024 at 13:18 hours. The injuries on the person of the two deceased, namely, Indrapreet Singh and Pawan Deep are suffered on one side. Indrapreet suffered four ante-mortem injuries and died due to shock and hemorrhage. Pawan Deep suffered two injuries and died due to shock and hemorrhage. He further submits that Indrapreet was riding motorcycle whereas the other deceased was a pillion rider. He is derived the inference from the statement of victim (injured-Vishal) that the motorcycle slipped. Further argument that 9 persons had beaten the three by kicks and fists and have also taken out the bamboo pole from the field and wielded it, not commensurate to the weapon used and persons involved. Further submits that there is no role attributed separately on the accused-persons. He further submits that the provisions of SC/ST Act also does not attract, as no caste related words have been used by the accused-appellants and it is merely the use of (DJ) music, which was the motive behind the altercation. Further submits that despite the F.I.R. being delayed, it was registered for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. After investigation the Investigating Officer has submitted the charge-sheet for the offence of murder, which does not attract in the present case, hence, quashing of bail rejection order dated

07.01.2025 passed by Exclusive Court of SC/ST Act (Special Judge SC/ST Act) in Bail Application No.3833 of 2024 (Vijay Verma and another Versus State of U.P. and another) arising out of Case Crime No.478 of 2024 under Sections 191(1), 191(2), 191(3), 103(2), 352, 351(3) of B.N.S. and 3(1) Da,3(1)Dha, 3(2) Va of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Lalganj, District Pratapgarh.

6. Learned A.G.A. has submitted that statement of injured witness cannot be ignored. The injured witness in his statement has made specific mention about roles of the accused. The mere mention that the victims while driving the motorcycle slipped and suffered injuries will not be inferred that the injuries have been suffered by the deceased due to accident, when statements of other witnesses clearly shows the name of the accused-appellants 3 CRLA No. 518 of 2025 along with other co-accused. Further submits that the delay in lodging the F.I.R. does not reap any benefit for the accused- appellants. The matter is of double murder. He further submits that there is recovery of bamboo poles from the accused, which were used in the crime. He, therefore, opposed the contention raised by learned counsel for the appellants.

7. There is no one from the side of opposite party no.2 to counter the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the appellants.

8. This Court has taken into consideration rival submissions made by the parties and perused the record.

9. Prima facie, the F.I.R. is lodged with delay as the occurrence which is shown in the F.I.R. is of 22:15 hours of 16.11.2024 and the F.I.R. has been registered on 17.11.2024 at 13:18 hours at the Police Station Lalganj, Pratapgarh, which is situated merely four kms away from the place of incident. It is averred in the F.I.R. that there was an altercation between the accused and deceased as well as injured while playing of DJ at the time of Dwarpooja; the informant along with family members came to join the marriage party. The role of accused is mentioned in the F.I.R. which is similar that of all the accused that they have beaten the injured and the deceased with kicks and fists. The weapon used are bamboo poles fixed on the boundary of agricultural field. The deceased Indrapreet suffered four injuries on his face and head. The parietal bone was fractured. One injury sustained by the deceased Pawan Deep is on the head with fracture of occipital bone whereas multiple abrasions of knee was seen. The matter apparently seems to be of altercation between the parties on playing of DJ in the night, which is the case of the prosecution. The charge-sheet is submitted. The accused-appellants are languishing in jail since 18.11.2024. Moreover, by order dated

14.10.2025 passed by this Court the current status of trial has been summoned, which is still awaited. This Court, therefore, is of the view that the appeal is liable to be allowed.

10. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.

11. The order dated 07.01.2025, passed by Special Judge, SC/ST 4 CRLA No. 518 of 2025 (Prevention of atrocities) Act, Pratapgarh in Bail Application No.3833 of 2024 (Vijay Verma and another Versus State of U.P. and another) arising out of Case Crime No.478 of 2024 under Sections 191(1), 191(2), 191(3), 103(2), 352, 351(3) of B.N.S. and 3(1) Da,3(1)Dha, 3(2) Va of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Lalganj, District Pratapgarh, is set aside.

12. The appellants, Vijay Verma and Rahul Verma involved in Case Crime No.478 of 2024 under Sections 191(1), 191(2), 191(3), 103(2), 352, 351(3) of B.N.S. and 3(1) Da,3(1)Dha, 3(2) Va of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Lalganj, District Pratapgarh shall be released on each of them furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned. December 1, 2025 MN/- (Avnish Saxena,J.) MAHENDRA NATH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench