Allowed

Vikki Mishra Alias Adarsh Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Dept. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC25 May 2024BAIL/5686/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Justice Subhash Vidyarthi allowed a bail application for Vikki Mishra in a section 304/323 IPC assault case. The court noted the FIR was lodged two days post-incident, key evidence (CCTV) was absent from the case diary, and other co-accused had already secured bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence or witnesses and appearing at trials.

Vikki Mishra Alias Adarsh Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:40024

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5686 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vikki Mishra Alias Adarsh Mishra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Dept. Home Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Jay Krishna Shukla,Avaneesh Sharma

¶6

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶7

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶8

1.Heard Sri Jay Krishna Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Abhishek Kumar, learned State Counsel.

¶9

By means of the instant application, the applicant is seeking release on bail in Case Crime No.291 of 2023, under sections 304, 323 of I.P.C., Police Station-Aaspur Devsara, DistrictPratapgarh.

¶10

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 20.08.2023 stating that some unknown persons had assaulted informant's nephew Dharmendra Shukla at 11.00 a.m on 18.08.2023 near Saifabad crossing gate. In the statement of the informant recorded under section 161 of Cr.P.C., he has stated that when he made enquiries after visiting the spot of occurrence, shopkeepers Amanullah and Ramesh Yadav told him about the entire facts of the incident. He had seen the CCTV footage of the camera installed in the shop of Ramesh Yadav and came to know that his nephew had been assaulted by Anand Mishra, Rishabh Shukla (the applicant), Praveen Mishra (applicant) and Vikki Mishra along with some unknown persons.

¶11

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it is stated that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case. Criminal history of four other cases has been disclosed in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and a supplementary affidavit in one of which the applicant has been released on bail and he has not received and notice/summon regarding any other case.

¶12

A co-accused Praveen Mishra has been granted bail by means of an order dated 29.04.2024 passed Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 3974 of 2024, in which it is recorded that one of the witnesses Ram Singh Yadav (who has been referred to Ramesh

¶13

Yadav in the statement of the informant under section 161 Cr.P.C.) stated that the incident was recorded in the CCTV camera installed in his shop and he has handed over a pen drive containing the footage of the incident. Co-accused Rishabh Shukla has been granted bail by means of an order dated 09.05.2024 passed by this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 5007 of 2024.Another co-accused Anand Mishra, has been granted bail by means of an order dated 22.05.2024 passed by this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 5510 of 2024.

¶14

Learned State Counsel has opposed the bail application, but he could not dispute the fact that the CCTV footage is not a part of the case diary.

¶15

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the F.I.R. of the incident was lodged after two days after the incident and yet the applicant is not named in it; the informant claims to have implicated the applicant after examining the CCTV footage of the incident and identified the applicant therein but no such CCTV footage has been made available to the Investigating Officer; the informant further claims that the incident was witnessed by a shopkeeper Amanullah but the investigating officer has not recorded statement of Amanullah and the applicant is languishing in jail since 06.03.2024 whereas all the other co-accused persons have been granted bail, I am of the view that the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail.

¶16

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

¶17

Let the applicant- Vikki Mishra Alias Adarsh Mishra be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to the following conditions: -

¶18

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶19

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶20

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶21

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶22

Order Date :- 25.5.2024 Preeti.

¶23

Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Vikki Mishra Alias Adarsh Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Dept. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikki Mishra Alias Adarsh Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Dept. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State of U.P. Vs Bachan Singh and Others

Vijai Kumar and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. Thru Collector Barabanki and 2 Ors.

District Assistant Registrar Cooperative Societies and Anr. Vs D.J. Hardoi and 2 Ors.

Sanjay Kumar Jha Vs Union of India Thru. Directorate of Enforcement Thru. Assistant Director

Vikki Mishra Alias Adarsh Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Dept. Home Lko.

Shiv Kumar Singh S/O Jagat Pal Singh Objection Filed Vs State of U.P. Thru D.M./Collector Shrawasti and Anr.