High Court · 2025

Sri Manish Kumar Tripathi, Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant and the same is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manish Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 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. 61 of 2025, under sections 318(4), 319(3), 336(3), 338, 340(2) of the B.N.S., Police Station-Khargupur, District-Gonda. 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 added that though the applicant is named in the first information report, but, the case of the applicant is identical to the case of co- accused namely, Raju Mishra, who has already been enlarged on bail by a coordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 12-06-2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5014 of 2025. He submits that the case of the applicant is identical in the sense that the recovery of Rs. 1 Lac has also been made from the present applicant including the co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail. He further submits that except apart, there is no other cogent piece of evidence so as to connect the applicant in the instant matter and the chargesheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidences. He added that the applicant has a case criminal history, which has been explained and he is languishing in jail since 05-04-2025 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra,learned counsel appearing for the complainant has vehemently opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the first information report and as such, the case of the present applicant is not identical to the case of co-accused, Raju Mishra. He also submitted that the applicant is key player and as such, he is not entitled for any relief. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has also pointed out that there is a case criminal history of the applicant and he is named in the first information report and as such, he is not entitled for any relief. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is named in the first information report, but, after entering into some extent of merit, it is apparent that except apart recovery of Rs. 1 Lac from the applicant including the other co-accused, Raju Mishra, there is no other in similarity in between them; the applicant has a case criminal history, which has been explained; the chargesheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidences; the applicant is languishing in jail since 05-04-2025 coupled with the fact that he has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 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, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant-Ashok Kumar Chauhan 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) 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.; (4) 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. 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. 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 :- 27.6.2025 AKS ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sri Manish Kumar Tripathi, Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant and the same is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manish Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 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. 61 of 2025, under sections 318(4), 319(3), 336(3), 338, 340(2) of the B.N.S., Police Station-Khargupur, District-Gonda. 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 added that though the applicant is named in the first information report, but, the case of the applicant is identical to the case of co- accused namely, Raju Mishra, who has already been enlarged on bail by a coordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 12-06-2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5014 of 2025. He submits that the case of the applicant is identical in the sense that the recovery of Rs. 1 Lac has also been made from the present applicant including the co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail. He further submits that except apart, there is no other cogent piece of evidence so as to connect the applicant in the instant matter and the chargesheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidences. He added that the applicant has a case criminal history, which has been explained and he is languishing in jail since 05-04-2025 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra,learned counsel appearing for the complainant has vehemently opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the first information report and as such, the case of the present applicant is not identical to the case of co-accused, Raju Mishra. He also submitted that the applicant is key player and as such, he is not entitled for any relief. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has also pointed out that there is a case criminal history of the applicant and he is named in the first information report and as such, he is not entitled for any relief. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is named in the first information report, but, after entering into some extent of merit, it is apparent that except apart recovery of Rs. 1 Lac from the applicant including the other co-accused, Raju Mishra, there is no other in similarity in between them; the applicant has a case criminal history, which has been explained; the chargesheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidences; the applicant is languishing in jail since 05-04-2025 coupled with the fact that he has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 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, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant-Ashok Kumar Chauhan 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) 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.; (4) 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. 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. 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 :- 27.6.2025 AKS ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench