Sudhanshu @ Rashu Srivastava v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt

Applicant :- Sudhanshu @ Rashu Srivastava Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Vyas Narayan Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.135 of 2025, under Sections 109, 115 (2), 351(3) of BNS Act, 2023, P.S. Gauriganj, District Amethi. It is submitted that this Court has granted bail to co-accused Jay Prakash Kashyap vide order dated 23.06.2025 passed in CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 5426 of 2025. The relevant portion of the order dated 23.06.2025 reads as under: "The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.135 of 2025, under Sections 109, 115 (2), 351(3) of BNS Act, 2023, P.S. Gauriganj, District Amethi.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. along with other co- accused persons but no specific role has been assigned to any of them. He submits that there are three injured persons and out of them, one has received serious injuries and even in their statements, there is no disclosure that who is real culprit. He next submits that there is no criminal history of the applicant, which has been explained in para 17 of the bail application and the applicant is languishing in jail since 6.5.2025 and in case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the applicant is involved in committing the aforesaid offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. along with other co-accused persons but no specific role has been assigned to any of them; there are three injured persons and out of them, one has received serious injuries and even in their statements, there is no disclosure that who is real culprit; there is no criminal history of the applicant, which has been explained in para 17 of the bail application and the applicant is languishing in jail since 6.5.2025and he has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if granted and would co-operate 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 case of bail.

Let the applicant Jay Prakash Kashyap involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail," Taking note of the aforesaid as also the fact of the present case, this Court finds that the case of the applicant is similar to the case of the co-accused Jai Prakash Kashyap as also the fact that the applicant has criminal history of six cases which have been explained in para 16 of the affidavit filed in support of application and he has been languishing in jail since 06.05.2025 accordingly, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Let applicant- Sudhanshu @ Rashu Srivastava, be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond to the satisfaction of the court concerned forthwith. Applicant is also directed to furnish two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (1) Applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.

(2) Applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court. (3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. (4) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad. (5) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned. (6) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 11.8.2025 Mohit Singh/- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench