High Court · 2025

Learned counsel for the complainant is not present even after the case is called out in the revised list. Learned counsel for the applicant prays for and is granted four days' time to file Rejoinder AfÏdavit. List/put up this matter in the week commencing 10-02- 2025". Vide the aforesaid order, the court noted that learned counsel for the complainant was not present even after the case was called out in the revised list. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the court is proceeding in this matter. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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. 429 of 2024 under sections 498A, 504, 506, 307, 120- B, 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC and section 3/4 of D.P. Act P.S.- Chinhat District -Lucknow. 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 submits that the applicant is father-in-law of the victim and he was never involved in committing the offence. He further added that so far as the allegation against the applicant for committing attempt to murder of the victim is concerned that has been narrated as a story and in fact there is no specific complaint at the time of the incident alleged to have taken place. He further submits that chargesheet has been filed and thus, there is no possibility of fleeing away of the applicant from the investigation proceedings. Further he would not tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses. He added that the applicant is languishing in jail since 09.09.2024 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. Further submitted that the identically situated co- accused namely, Praveen Kumar Shukla has already been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 19-12-2024 passed in Criminal Misc.Bail Application No. 13110 of 2024 and the applicant is seeking parity of the same. Per contra, learned AGA 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, but, he could not dispute the fact that identically situated co-accused named above, has already been enlarged on bail by this court. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is languishing in jail since 09.09.2024; 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. 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. Let the applicant- Dinesh Kumar Shukla 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 :- 13.2.2025 AKS ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Learned counsel for the complainant is not present even after the case is called out in the revised list. Learned counsel for the applicant prays for and is granted four days' time to file Rejoinder AfÏdavit. List/put up this matter in the week commencing 10-02- 2025". Vide the aforesaid order, the court noted that learned counsel for the complainant was not present even after the case was called out in the revised list. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the court is proceeding in this matter. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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. 429 of 2024 under sections 498A, 504, 506, 307, 120- B, 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC and section 3/4 of D.P. Act P.S.- Chinhat District -Lucknow. 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 submits that the applicant is father-in-law of the victim and he was never involved in committing the offence. He further added that so far as the allegation against the applicant for committing attempt to murder of the victim is concerned that has been narrated as a story and in fact there is no specific complaint at the time of the incident alleged to have taken place. He further submits that chargesheet has been filed and thus, there is no possibility of fleeing away of the applicant from the investigation proceedings. Further he would not tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses. He added that the applicant is languishing in jail since 09.09.2024 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. Further submitted that the identically situated co- accused namely, Praveen Kumar Shukla has already been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 19-12-2024 passed in Criminal Misc.Bail Application No. 13110 of 2024 and the applicant is seeking parity of the same. Per contra, learned AGA 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, but, he could not dispute the fact that identically situated co-accused named above, has already been enlarged on bail by this court. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is languishing in jail since 09.09.2024; 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. 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. Let the applicant- Dinesh Kumar Shukla 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 :- 13.2.2025 AKS ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench