High Court · 2025

1. Heard Sri O.P. Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Hari Shanker Maurya, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant (Kandhai) with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 208 of 2024, under Section 105, 115(2), 352 BNS, P.S.-Asoha, District-Unnao.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that in fact, the present applicant including three other co-accused persons is implicated though motive has been assigned to co-accused Deepak. Thus, the role of the applicant is distinguishable from that of co-accused Deepak. He submits that there is no post-mortem report and only on the basis of CT scan, the charge-sheet has been filed. He further submitted that general role has been assigned to all the accused persons and this cannot be segregated at this stage that on whose blow the deceased received injuries. Further submission is that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and there is no criminal history of the applicant, which has been indicated in para 23 of the bail application and the applicant is languishing in jail since 12.11.2024 and in case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would co- operate in the trial proceedings properly. Further submission is that the co-accused, Shubham, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 12.02.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1294 of 2025, therefore, on the basis of principles of parity, the present applicant may also be enlarged on bail.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the applicant is involved in committing the aforesaid offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid contention of learned counsel for the applicant.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that the role of the applicant is distinguishable from that of co-accused Deepak as motive has been assigned to co-accused Deepak; there is no post mortem report; the charge sheet has been filed as such there is no possibility of tampering the evidence or threatening the witnesses; general role has been assigned to all the accused persons and this cannot be segregated at this stage that on whose blow the deceased received injuries; there is no criminal history of the applicant; the applicant is languishing in jail since 12.11.2024; and he has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if granted and would co-operate in the trial proceedings.

6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and considering the fact that the co-accused, Subham, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 12.02.2025 (supra), without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

7. Let the applicant (Kandhai) involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his 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 file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 of B.N.S.S., 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 the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

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

9. 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 :- 6.3.2025 Suresh/ [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard Sri O.P. Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Hari Shanker Maurya, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant (Kandhai) with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 208 of 2024, under Section 105, 115(2), 352 BNS, P.S.-Asoha, District-Unnao.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that in fact, the present applicant including three other co-accused persons is implicated though motive has been assigned to co-accused Deepak. Thus, the role of the applicant is distinguishable from that of co-accused Deepak. He submits that there is no post-mortem report and only on the basis of CT scan, the charge-sheet has been filed. He further submitted that general role has been assigned to all the accused persons and this cannot be segregated at this stage that on whose blow the deceased received injuries. Further submission is that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and there is no criminal history of the applicant, which has been indicated in para 23 of the bail application and the applicant is languishing in jail since 12.11.2024 and in case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would co- operate in the trial proceedings properly. Further submission is that the co-accused, Shubham, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 12.02.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1294 of 2025, therefore, on the basis of principles of parity, the present applicant may also be enlarged on bail.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the applicant is involved in committing the aforesaid offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid contention of learned counsel for the applicant.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that the role of the applicant is distinguishable from that of co-accused Deepak as motive has been assigned to co-accused Deepak; there is no post mortem report; the charge sheet has been filed as such there is no possibility of tampering the evidence or threatening the witnesses; general role has been assigned to all the accused persons and this cannot be segregated at this stage that on whose blow the deceased received injuries; there is no criminal history of the applicant; the applicant is languishing in jail since 12.11.2024; and he has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if granted and would co-operate in the trial proceedings.

6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and considering the fact that the co-accused, Subham, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 12.02.2025 (supra), without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

7. Let the applicant (Kandhai) involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his 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 file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 of B.N.S.S., 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 the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

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

9. 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 :- 6.3.2025 Suresh/ [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench