Virendra Kumar Shukla v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko

Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Nisha Srivastava Misra, Shivam Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State, Smt. Nisha Srivastava, Advocate, who has filed her Power today on behalf of the complainant, which is taken on record and perused the record. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant, who is involved in F.I.R./Case Crime No.428 of 2025, under Sections 3(5), 109(1), 127(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352 of BNS, 2023, 30 Arms Act, Police Station-Loni Katra, District-Barabanki. It is alleged in the prosecution case that Deepchandra, younger brother of the informant went to charge E-rikshaw on Hussainabad Petrol Pump. After sometime, the accused persons came there. They started beating Deepchandra who has explained that he has taken permission from the employees of Petrol Pump. It is further alleged that they kept him hostage. Information was given to the complainant on phone whereupon, the complainant side has approached the petrol pump. The things intensified. It is further alleged that the applicant exhorted and directed the co- accused persons to make the complainant also, in captivity. Upon this, Shashank Shukla took gun kept inside 4-wheeler and with an intent to kill, shot Lavkush Dwivedi. He fell down on the ground. He fired second 2 BAIL No. 11719 of 2025 shot which came on the hand of Lavkush Dwivedi. He was sent to CHC, Trivediganj from where he was referred to KGMU Trauma Centre. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that both sides have sustained injuries. From the applicant side, there are three injured persons. The accused applicant has himself has received grievous injuries in the form of fracture in the neck. The injury sustained by the applicant side has not been explained by the prosecution. No specific role of causing injury has been assigned to the present applicant. The applicant's counsel has drawn attention of this court towards injuries sustained by injured Satish Chandra Dwivedi which are simple in nature. Another injured Deep Chand has also sustained simple injury in the form of complain of pain. Only one injured Lavkush Dwivedi has sustained two gun shot injuries, one on vital part which is not attributed to the applicant; rather to the co-accused Shashank Shukla. The co-accused Ritik Yadav against whom general allegation of beating has been levelled has been granted bail in Bail No.11375 of 2025. The applicant claims parity. It is lastly contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 04.11.2025. The applicant has explained criminal history of one case in para 37 of the bail application. Learned A.G.A and complainant's counsel have however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail. Learned counsel for complainant submits that role of exhortion is on the applicant. The licensee gun of the applicant has been used by the co- accused Shashank Shukla in shooting the injured. The first information report of the applicant has not been registered by the police and it is only after on an application under section 173(4) BNSS, the first information report of the accused applicant has been registered. 3 BAIL No. 11719 of 2025 Learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the bail application, however, she does not dispute the injuries sustained by the accused side. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record as also statement of the injured which has been shown by learned A.G.A. from the case diary, and also considering the nature of allegations, bail order of co-accused Ritik Yadav, role of the applicant prima facie appears to be distinct from the role of the co-accused Shashank Shukla upon whom role of firing has been assigned by the injured, both sides have sustained grievous injuries, injuries sustained by accused side have not been explained by the prosecution, the applicant is in jail since 4.11.2025, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Let applicant- Virendra Kumar Shukla be released on bail in the aforesaid F.I.R./case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (1) 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 of the Indian Penal Code. (2) 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. 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. (3) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. (4) The applicant will not indulge in any illegal activities during the period of bail. (5) In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court would 4 BAIL No. 11719 of 2025 be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. December 5, 2025 kkb/ (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Nisha Srivastava Misra, Shivam Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State, Smt. Nisha Srivastava, Advocate, who has filed her Power today on behalf of the complainant, which is taken on record and perused the record. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant, who is involved in F.I.R./Case Crime No.428 of 2025, under Sections 3(5), 109(1), 127(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352 of BNS, 2023, 30 Arms Act, Police Station-Loni Katra, District-Barabanki. It is alleged in the prosecution case that Deepchandra, younger brother of the informant went to charge E-rikshaw on Hussainabad Petrol Pump. After sometime, the accused persons came there. They started beating Deepchandra who has explained that he has taken permission from the employees of Petrol Pump. It is further alleged that they kept him hostage. Information was given to the complainant on phone whereupon, the complainant side has approached the petrol pump. The things intensified. It is further alleged that the applicant exhorted and directed the co- accused persons to make the complainant also, in captivity. Upon this, Shashank Shukla took gun kept inside 4-wheeler and with an intent to kill, shot Lavkush Dwivedi. He fell down on the ground. He fired second 2 BAIL No. 11719 of 2025 shot which came on the hand of Lavkush Dwivedi. He was sent to CHC, Trivediganj from where he was referred to KGMU Trauma Centre. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that both sides have sustained injuries. From the applicant side, there are three injured persons. The accused applicant has himself has received grievous injuries in the form of fracture in the neck. The injury sustained by the applicant side has not been explained by the prosecution. No specific role of causing injury has been assigned to the present applicant. The applicant's counsel has drawn attention of this court towards injuries sustained by injured Satish Chandra Dwivedi which are simple in nature. Another injured Deep Chand has also sustained simple injury in the form of complain of pain. Only one injured Lavkush Dwivedi has sustained two gun shot injuries, one on vital part which is not attributed to the applicant; rather to the co-accused Shashank Shukla. The co-accused Ritik Yadav against whom general allegation of beating has been levelled has been granted bail in Bail No.11375 of 2025. The applicant claims parity. It is lastly contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 04.11.2025. The applicant has explained criminal history of one case in para 37 of the bail application. Learned A.G.A and complainant's counsel have however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail. Learned counsel for complainant submits that role of exhortion is on the applicant. The licensee gun of the applicant has been used by the co- accused Shashank Shukla in shooting the injured. The first information report of the applicant has not been registered by the police and it is only after on an application under section 173(4) BNSS, the first information report of the accused applicant has been registered. 3 BAIL No. 11719 of 2025 Learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the bail application, however, she does not dispute the injuries sustained by the accused side. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record as also statement of the injured which has been shown by learned A.G.A. from the case diary, and also considering the nature of allegations, bail order of co-accused Ritik Yadav, role of the applicant prima facie appears to be distinct from the role of the co-accused Shashank Shukla upon whom role of firing has been assigned by the injured, both sides have sustained grievous injuries, injuries sustained by accused side have not been explained by the prosecution, the applicant is in jail since 4.11.2025, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Let applicant- Virendra Kumar Shukla be released on bail in the aforesaid F.I.R./case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (1) 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 of the Indian Penal Code. (2) 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. 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. (3) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. (4) The applicant will not indulge in any illegal activities during the period of bail. (5) In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court would 4 BAIL No. 11719 of 2025 be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. December 5, 2025 kkb/ (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench