High Court · 2025

1. Heard Shri Brijesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Anant Pratap Singh, 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 Session Trial No.748 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 59 of 2025 under Sections 103(1), 238, 3(5), 61(2) of B.N.S., Police Station- Gurubuxganj, District - Raebareli.

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 has further submitted that the applicant is not named in the present matter. He added that the brother of the applicant was murdered and it is startling fact that the applicant (sister of the deceased) is implicated only on the statement of the Subhasini, bhabhi of the applicant, who was in fact annoyed with the family members, including the present applicant and was living in her maika prior to 4 to 5 months of the alleged incident. He has also submitted that there is no eye-witness of the incident in question and the prosecution prima-facie failed to channelize the story of the murder. He next submits that prima facie, there is no evidence with respect to the fact that the present applicant was having any enmity with his brother. He also submits that the applicant is 26 years of age and his brother has been murdered and even he has been victimised and has been made scape-goat. He submits 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 and he is languishing in jail since 19.03.2025. Further, the co-accused - Raj Kumari has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 25.06.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.5642 of 2025, therefore, on the basis of principles of parity, the present applicant may also be released on bail. 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.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that after thorough investigation, it was found that the applicant was involved in committing offence and as such, he is not entitled for any relief.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the brother of the applicant was murdered and the applicant (sister of the deceased) is implicated only on the statement of the Subhasini, bhabhi of the applicant, who was living in her maika since prior to 4 to 5 months of the alleged incident, there is no eye-witness of the incident in question and the prosecution prima-facie failed to channelize the story of the murder; there is no evidence with respect to the fact that the applicant was having any enmity with his brother; the applicant is 26 years of age and his brother has been murdered and even he has been victimised; 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; the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 19.03.2025; the co- accused Raj Kumari, has been enlarged on bail by this Court; prima facie, there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect her 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 co- operate in the trial proceedings.

6. 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.

7. Let the applicant- Sachin, 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 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. Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Mohd. Sharif MOHAMMAD SHARIF MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench

1. Heard Shri Brijesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Anant Pratap Singh, 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 Session Trial No.748 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 59 of 2025 under Sections 103(1), 238, 3(5), 61(2) of B.N.S., Police Station- Gurubuxganj, District - Raebareli.

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 has further submitted that the applicant is not named in the present matter. He added that the brother of the applicant was murdered and it is startling fact that the applicant (sister of the deceased) is implicated only on the statement of the Subhasini, bhabhi of the applicant, who was in fact annoyed with the family members, including the present applicant and was living in her maika prior to 4 to 5 months of the alleged incident. He has also submitted that there is no eye-witness of the incident in question and the prosecution prima-facie failed to channelize the story of the murder. He next submits that prima facie, there is no evidence with respect to the fact that the present applicant was having any enmity with his brother. He also submits that the applicant is 26 years of age and his brother has been murdered and even he has been victimised and has been made scape-goat. He submits 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 and he is languishing in jail since 19.03.2025. Further, the co-accused - Raj Kumari has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 25.06.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.5642 of 2025, therefore, on the basis of principles of parity, the present applicant may also be released on bail. 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.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that after thorough investigation, it was found that the applicant was involved in committing offence and as such, he is not entitled for any relief.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the brother of the applicant was murdered and the applicant (sister of the deceased) is implicated only on the statement of the Subhasini, bhabhi of the applicant, who was living in her maika since prior to 4 to 5 months of the alleged incident, there is no eye-witness of the incident in question and the prosecution prima-facie failed to channelize the story of the murder; there is no evidence with respect to the fact that the applicant was having any enmity with his brother; the applicant is 26 years of age and his brother has been murdered and even he has been victimised; 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; the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 19.03.2025; the co- accused Raj Kumari, has been enlarged on bail by this Court; prima facie, there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect her 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 co- operate in the trial proceedings.

6. 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.

7. Let the applicant- Sachin, 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 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. Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Mohd. Sharif MOHAMMAD SHARIF MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench