High Court · 2025

1. Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Verma, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Sri Arjun Kumar Kaushal, learned counsel, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant/ informant, the same is taken on record.

2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Santosh Kumar) is languishing in jail since 19.10.2024 in Case Crime No.0255 of 2024, under Sections 110, 115 (2), 351 (2), 352 & 105 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station- Bazar Shukla, District- Amethi.

3.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.).

4. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the general allegation of assault and beating has been levelled against four accused persons including the present applicant. The main allegation has been levelled against his father. The present applicant is son of Ram Kripal, therefore, he is also an accused in this case.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that for ancestral property two suits are pending between the parties. The present applicant has not attributed any specific role or weapon to assault the victim (since deceased). As per statement of one eye witness, his father Ram Kripal was beating the victim (since deceased) through Bamboo Cane whereas the present applicant was beating the victim (since deceased) with fists and kicks. The cause of death is Coma due to antemortem head injury and the present applicant was admittedly not possessing any weapon. He has been implicated only for the reason that he is a son of Ram Kripal. Learned counsel has further stated that the co-accused Reeta Devi has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 30.01.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.956 of 2025, therefore, the present applicant may be enlarge on bail on the basis of principles of pairity. The charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. He undertakes on behalf of the present applicant that he shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order.

6. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate as well as Sri Arjun Kumar Kaushal, learned counsel for the complainant/ informant have, however, opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the present applicant had actively participated in the act of crime, therefore, he is equally responsible like other accused persons, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail, but they could not dispute the aforesaid contentions of learned counsel for the applicant.

7.Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that no specific role or weapon to assault the victim (since deceased) has been attributed to the present applicant; he has been implicated only for the reason that he is a son of co- accused Ram Kripal; the cause of death is Coma due to antemortem head injury and the present applicant was admittedly not possessing any weapon; the charge-sheet has been filed; he is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever and the undertaking that she shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order; without expressing any opinion on merits of the issue, I am of the view that the present applicant may be released on bail in this case.

8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant (Santosh Kumar) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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.

10. Before parting with it is made clear that since the specific allegation has been levelled against co-accused Ram Kripal, therefore, he may not seek pairity with the present applicant and his wife Reeta Devi. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Verma, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Sri Arjun Kumar Kaushal, learned counsel, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant/ informant, the same is taken on record.

2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Santosh Kumar) is languishing in jail since 19.10.2024 in Case Crime No.0255 of 2024, under Sections 110, 115 (2), 351 (2), 352 & 105 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station- Bazar Shukla, District- Amethi.

3.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.).

4. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the general allegation of assault and beating has been levelled against four accused persons including the present applicant. The main allegation has been levelled against his father. The present applicant is son of Ram Kripal, therefore, he is also an accused in this case.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that for ancestral property two suits are pending between the parties. The present applicant has not attributed any specific role or weapon to assault the victim (since deceased). As per statement of one eye witness, his father Ram Kripal was beating the victim (since deceased) through Bamboo Cane whereas the present applicant was beating the victim (since deceased) with fists and kicks. The cause of death is Coma due to antemortem head injury and the present applicant was admittedly not possessing any weapon. He has been implicated only for the reason that he is a son of Ram Kripal. Learned counsel has further stated that the co-accused Reeta Devi has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 30.01.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.956 of 2025, therefore, the present applicant may be enlarge on bail on the basis of principles of pairity. The charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. He undertakes on behalf of the present applicant that he shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order.

6. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate as well as Sri Arjun Kumar Kaushal, learned counsel for the complainant/ informant have, however, opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the present applicant had actively participated in the act of crime, therefore, he is equally responsible like other accused persons, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail, but they could not dispute the aforesaid contentions of learned counsel for the applicant.

7.Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that no specific role or weapon to assault the victim (since deceased) has been attributed to the present applicant; he has been implicated only for the reason that he is a son of co- accused Ram Kripal; the cause of death is Coma due to antemortem head injury and the present applicant was admittedly not possessing any weapon; the charge-sheet has been filed; he is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever and the undertaking that she shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order; without expressing any opinion on merits of the issue, I am of the view that the present applicant may be released on bail in this case.

8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant (Santosh Kumar) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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.

10. Before parting with it is made clear that since the specific allegation has been levelled against co-accused Ram Kripal, therefore, he may not seek pairity with the present applicant and his wife Reeta Devi. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench