Inderjeet v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 19 Aug 2025
- Bench
- KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR
- Neutral citation
- 2025:AHC-LKO:48514
Outcome
Bail granted
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 201, 302
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 82, 161
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ss. 209, 269
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 84
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.337 of 2023, under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C., P.S. Kachchauna, District Hardoi. In the prosecution case it is alleged that on 31.08.2023, she has lodged a missing report regarding her son Awadhesh at police station Kachchauna. On 08.09.2023 on the basis of suspicion police along with her husband Mahesh @ Patwari and some other villagers went to the house of Kaushal where some bad smell was coming. Water tank was made in the house and when police has opened the water tank then saw that dead body and on the basis of cloth body was identified. She further showed her suspicion that Kaushal and Indrajeet have killed her son Awadhesh and conceal the dead body in the water tank made in the house of Kaushal.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that except the last seen evidence of Manoj Kumar, Rajendra under Section 161 Cr.P.C., there is no other material against the applicant. It is submitted that last seen evidence is not enough. The chain of circumstance is not complete. Only on the basis of suspicion, applicant has been implicated. There is no recovery from the present applicant. He submits that the applicant has no criminal history although he is languishing in jail since 27.09.2023. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer and has submitted that dead body of the deceased has been found in the house of the co-accused Kaushal Kishore. Applicant is real brother of Kaushal Kishore and is residing immediately next to his house. He submits that confessional statement of applicant has been recorded in police custody. Perused the record. A perusal of the post mortem report shows that deceased died due to coma on account of ante mortem head injury i.e. contusion 5 cm X 4 cm present on the left side of the head.
Operative part
On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 27.09.2023, case is of circumstantial evidence and except the last seen evidence recorded after delay prima facie there appears to be no other material against the applicant, prima facie chain of circumstance do not appear to be complete, applicant has no criminal history and the confessional statement of the accused applicant in custody and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Inderjeet be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) 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. (v) 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 of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 269 of BNS).
(vi) 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. (now Section 84 BNSS) 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 of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 209 BNS). Order Date :- 19.8.2025 Saurabh Yadav/- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the bail application is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 201, 302; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 82, 161; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 209, 269; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 84.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Allahabad High Court, on 19 Aug 2025. The bench was KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.