High Court · 2025

2. While pressing the amendment application, learned counsel for the applicant submits that inadvertently Section 103(1) B.N.S. has been left to be transcribed in the bail application and prays that he may be permitted to amend the memo of bail application and incorporate the same in the memo of bail application.

3. Learned A.G.A. has no objection to the aforesaid prayed.

4. In view of the above, the amendment application is allowed.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to amend the memo of bail application by incorporating necessary correction, as prayed for, during course of the day. (Order on Bail Application)

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 239 of 2024, under Sections 109, 191(2), 191(3), 190, 103(1), 115(2), 117(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (in short 'B.N.S.'), Police Station- Motigarpur, District - Sultanpur.

3. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He also submits that the role of the applicant is of beating with lathi and danda and one of the co-accused namely Vipin Singh, who has been assigned role of firearm, has already been enlarged on bail by a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.06.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5209 of 2025, which is quoted here-in-below: "1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State of U.P., learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.239 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 352, 351(2), 351(3), 190, 103(1) B.N.S., Police Station - Motigarpur, District - Sultanpur, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case and he is in jail since 21.9.2024. As per the prosecution case, incident was taken place on 19.9.2024, then F.I.R. of the case in question was lodged by Randheer Singh. He also submits that Abhishek Singh, who is claiming himself as an eye witness also stated that he received injuries during the course of incident when his uncle was beaten by the applicant and other co-accused persons. During the course of investigation, medico legal examination of Abhisehk Singh was conducted on 24.9.2024 but the delay has not been explained. In the statement of Abhishek Singh, who is claiming himself as an injured witness, he stated that at the time of incident, applicant and Arjun reached on the spot by a vehicle and they were having iron rods in their hands, by which, they assaulted him as well as the deceased. In the investigation, the presence of Arjun Singh was found at some other place, as a result, his name was dropped by the Investigating Officer. It is also submitted that danda was recovered on the pointing out of the applicant and co-accused persons but the involvement of Arjun was found false who came on the spot alongwith the applicant, therefore, the investigation of the case in question is faulty. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have oppose the prayer for grant of bail and submit that applicant actively participated in the incident as the injured witness in his statement has categorically define the role of the applicant but they do not dispute this fact that applicant reached on the spot alongwith Arjun having iron rod and thereafter, danda was recovered on the pointing out of the applicant and Arjun but name of Arjun was dropped by the Investigating Officer on the basis of plea of alibi.

5. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A., material available on record, contents of F.I.R. including the statement of the injured Abhishek Singh, it is evident that as per the prosecution case, incident was taken place on 19.9.2024 but the medico legal examination of Abhishek was conducted on 24.9.2024 but the delay has not been explained, it is also evident that applicant along with Arjun reached on the spot by a vehicle and recovery was also shown by the Investigating Officer but during the course of investigation, name of Arjun was dropped on the basis of plea of alibi, therefore, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

6. Let applicant - Vipin Singh - be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (ii) 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. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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. (iv) 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 BNS. (v) 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 BNS, may be issued and if 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/209 BNS. (vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 BNS. 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.

7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

8. Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously, without giving any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties."

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the case of the present applicant is on better footing than the case of co- accused Vipin Singh. Further submission is that the charge sheet has been filed against the applicant thus, there is no possibility that he would tamper the evidence or would threaten the witnesses, coupled with the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph No. 17 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 21.09.2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would co-operate in the trial proceedings. Thus, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid but he could not dispute the fact that identically situated co-accused Vipin Singh has already been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

6. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the role of the applicant is of beating with lathi and danda and one of the co-accused namely Vipin Singh, who has been assigned role of firearm, has already been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.06.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5209 of 2025; the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph No. 17 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 21.09.2024; prima facie, there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him with the offence, coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

7. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, 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, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

8. Let the applicant- Rishu Singh @ Himanshu Singh 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 not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (ii) 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. He 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 Penal Code; (iii) 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.; and (iv) 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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

9. 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.

10. 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 :- 25.6.2025 (Manoj K.) MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

2. While pressing the amendment application, learned counsel for the applicant submits that inadvertently Section 103(1) B.N.S. has been left to be transcribed in the bail application and prays that he may be permitted to amend the memo of bail application and incorporate the same in the memo of bail application.

3. Learned A.G.A. has no objection to the aforesaid prayed.

4. In view of the above, the amendment application is allowed.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to amend the memo of bail application by incorporating necessary correction, as prayed for, during course of the day. (Order on Bail Application)

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 239 of 2024, under Sections 109, 191(2), 191(3), 190, 103(1), 115(2), 117(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (in short 'B.N.S.'), Police Station- Motigarpur, District - Sultanpur.

3. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He also submits that the role of the applicant is of beating with lathi and danda and one of the co-accused namely Vipin Singh, who has been assigned role of firearm, has already been enlarged on bail by a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.06.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5209 of 2025, which is quoted here-in-below: "1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State of U.P., learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.239 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 352, 351(2), 351(3), 190, 103(1) B.N.S., Police Station - Motigarpur, District - Sultanpur, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case and he is in jail since 21.9.2024. As per the prosecution case, incident was taken place on 19.9.2024, then F.I.R. of the case in question was lodged by Randheer Singh. He also submits that Abhishek Singh, who is claiming himself as an eye witness also stated that he received injuries during the course of incident when his uncle was beaten by the applicant and other co-accused persons. During the course of investigation, medico legal examination of Abhisehk Singh was conducted on 24.9.2024 but the delay has not been explained. In the statement of Abhishek Singh, who is claiming himself as an injured witness, he stated that at the time of incident, applicant and Arjun reached on the spot by a vehicle and they were having iron rods in their hands, by which, they assaulted him as well as the deceased. In the investigation, the presence of Arjun Singh was found at some other place, as a result, his name was dropped by the Investigating Officer. It is also submitted that danda was recovered on the pointing out of the applicant and co-accused persons but the involvement of Arjun was found false who came on the spot alongwith the applicant, therefore, the investigation of the case in question is faulty. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have oppose the prayer for grant of bail and submit that applicant actively participated in the incident as the injured witness in his statement has categorically define the role of the applicant but they do not dispute this fact that applicant reached on the spot alongwith Arjun having iron rod and thereafter, danda was recovered on the pointing out of the applicant and Arjun but name of Arjun was dropped by the Investigating Officer on the basis of plea of alibi.

5. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A., material available on record, contents of F.I.R. including the statement of the injured Abhishek Singh, it is evident that as per the prosecution case, incident was taken place on 19.9.2024 but the medico legal examination of Abhishek was conducted on 24.9.2024 but the delay has not been explained, it is also evident that applicant along with Arjun reached on the spot by a vehicle and recovery was also shown by the Investigating Officer but during the course of investigation, name of Arjun was dropped on the basis of plea of alibi, therefore, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

6. Let applicant - Vipin Singh - be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (ii) 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. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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. (iv) 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 BNS. (v) 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 BNS, may be issued and if 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/209 BNS. (vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 BNS. 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.

7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

8. Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously, without giving any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties."

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the case of the present applicant is on better footing than the case of co- accused Vipin Singh. Further submission is that the charge sheet has been filed against the applicant thus, there is no possibility that he would tamper the evidence or would threaten the witnesses, coupled with the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph No. 17 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 21.09.2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would co-operate in the trial proceedings. Thus, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid but he could not dispute the fact that identically situated co-accused Vipin Singh has already been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

6. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the role of the applicant is of beating with lathi and danda and one of the co-accused namely Vipin Singh, who has been assigned role of firearm, has already been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.06.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5209 of 2025; the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph No. 17 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 21.09.2024; prima facie, there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him with the offence, coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

7. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, 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, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

8. Let the applicant- Rishu Singh @ Himanshu Singh 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 not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (ii) 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. He 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 Penal Code; (iii) 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.; and (iv) 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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

9. 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.

10. 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 :- 25.6.2025 (Manoj K.) MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench