High Court · 2025

1. Heard Sri Avinash Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mukesh Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and Ms. Supriya Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit documents of the applicants relating to his education, same is taken on record. enclosing therewith

3. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 11.10.2024 in Case Crime No. 297 of 2024 u/s 191(2), 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023 and 3/25 of Arms Act, P.S. Dostpur, District Sultanpur. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged.

4. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the general allegations of discreet firing upon the deceased by the four accused persons and one unknown person, however, during the course of the investigation the fact emerged that the discreet firing has been done by the co-accused Raj Verma s/o late Rakesh Verma, Pradeep Verrma s/o late Shivnath and Saurabh s/o Ram Autar, the present applicant, however, no specific role of firing has been attributed to the present applicant. Attention has also been drawn towards Annexure no. 8 which is a statement of the informant Himanshu Agrahari who has levelled allegations of discreet firing on the above named three accused persons. One Vikas Agrahari has levelled allegation of discreet firing on Raj Verma and Pradeep Verma, however, one eye witness Kallu Agrahari has levelled allegation of discreet firing upon the above named accused persons. Further attention has been drawn towards para 23 of the counter affidavit wherein the Circle Officer, the deponent of the affidavit has stated that the co-accused Raj Verma has killed Santram @ Lallu.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has fairly stated that the aforesaid fact being narrated by the deponent of the counter affidavit does not corroborate with the statements so recorded but the version of the Circle Officer concerned may not be disputed. Therefore, the present applicant has got case to be released on bail. He has further submitted that after the arrest of the applicant he has been implicated in one more case wherein he has been enlarged on bail as recital to this effect has been given in para 4 of the supplementary affidavit enclosing therewith the copy of the bail order. The aforesaid bail order has been passed by the learned court-below.

6. Learned counsel has lastly submitted that the present applicant is the student pursuing his B.T.C. course from Ram Baran Mahavidyalaya, Vibharpur, Jaisinghpur, Sultanpur (U.P.) as recital to this effect has been given in para 2 of the supplementary affidavit. Therefore, learned counsel has stated that considering the aforesaid fact the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

7. The learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted.

8. Learned A.G.A. as well as Ms. Supriya Tiwari have opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the present applicant is student only for the name sake as he does not attend the classes rather involved in illegal activities. He used to threaten the informant about dire consequences and has compelled to withdraw the case.

9. Without entering into the merits of the case but considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that no specific role of firing has been attributed to the present applicant, fact s being narrated by the deponent of the counter affidavit does not corroborate with the statements so recorded, applicant is the student pursuing his B.T.C. course from Ram Baran Mahavidyalaya, Vibharpur, Jaisinghpur, Sultanpur (U.P.) and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

10. Bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant Saurabh Verma @ Kuldeep Verma, involved in aforesaid case 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he / she 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 / her under Section 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 84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 may be issued and if the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him / her in accordance with law, under Section 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 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 / her in accordance with law.

12. After release from jail the applicant shall not try to talk the informant and shall not influence him in any manner whatsoever, failing which the bail cancellation application may be filed by the learned counsel for the informant. . Order Date :- 9.7.2025 Om (Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.) OM PRAKASH MISHRA OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench

1. Heard Sri Avinash Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mukesh Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and Ms. Supriya Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit documents of the applicants relating to his education, same is taken on record. enclosing therewith

3. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 11.10.2024 in Case Crime No. 297 of 2024 u/s 191(2), 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023 and 3/25 of Arms Act, P.S. Dostpur, District Sultanpur. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged.

4. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the general allegations of discreet firing upon the deceased by the four accused persons and one unknown person, however, during the course of the investigation the fact emerged that the discreet firing has been done by the co-accused Raj Verma s/o late Rakesh Verma, Pradeep Verrma s/o late Shivnath and Saurabh s/o Ram Autar, the present applicant, however, no specific role of firing has been attributed to the present applicant. Attention has also been drawn towards Annexure no. 8 which is a statement of the informant Himanshu Agrahari who has levelled allegations of discreet firing on the above named three accused persons. One Vikas Agrahari has levelled allegation of discreet firing on Raj Verma and Pradeep Verma, however, one eye witness Kallu Agrahari has levelled allegation of discreet firing upon the above named accused persons. Further attention has been drawn towards para 23 of the counter affidavit wherein the Circle Officer, the deponent of the affidavit has stated that the co-accused Raj Verma has killed Santram @ Lallu.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has fairly stated that the aforesaid fact being narrated by the deponent of the counter affidavit does not corroborate with the statements so recorded but the version of the Circle Officer concerned may not be disputed. Therefore, the present applicant has got case to be released on bail. He has further submitted that after the arrest of the applicant he has been implicated in one more case wherein he has been enlarged on bail as recital to this effect has been given in para 4 of the supplementary affidavit enclosing therewith the copy of the bail order. The aforesaid bail order has been passed by the learned court-below.

6. Learned counsel has lastly submitted that the present applicant is the student pursuing his B.T.C. course from Ram Baran Mahavidyalaya, Vibharpur, Jaisinghpur, Sultanpur (U.P.) as recital to this effect has been given in para 2 of the supplementary affidavit. Therefore, learned counsel has stated that considering the aforesaid fact the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

7. The learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted.

8. Learned A.G.A. as well as Ms. Supriya Tiwari have opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the present applicant is student only for the name sake as he does not attend the classes rather involved in illegal activities. He used to threaten the informant about dire consequences and has compelled to withdraw the case.

9. Without entering into the merits of the case but considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that no specific role of firing has been attributed to the present applicant, fact s being narrated by the deponent of the counter affidavit does not corroborate with the statements so recorded, applicant is the student pursuing his B.T.C. course from Ram Baran Mahavidyalaya, Vibharpur, Jaisinghpur, Sultanpur (U.P.) and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

10. Bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant Saurabh Verma @ Kuldeep Verma, involved in aforesaid case 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he / she 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 / her under Section 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 84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 may be issued and if the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him / her in accordance with law, under Section 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 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 / her in accordance with law.

12. After release from jail the applicant shall not try to talk the informant and shall not influence him in any manner whatsoever, failing which the bail cancellation application may be filed by the learned counsel for the informant. . Order Date :- 9.7.2025 Om (Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.) OM PRAKASH MISHRA OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench