Ranjeet Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4078 of 2024

Ranjeet

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rahul Kumar Singh, Anagh Singh, Ashok Kumar Singh, Gulam Mustafa Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 12

¶9

HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J.

¶10

1. Two supplementary affidavits filed today in Court are taken on record.

¶11

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶12

3. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.427 of 2023, under Section 302, 323, 34 IPC, P.S. Purwa, District Unnao.

¶13

4. In terms of the FIR it was alleged that brother-in-law of the informant was having an enmity with the informant and the family. It was stated that on account of the death of the mother-in-law, certain amounts were received in the account of the applicant and on 14.09.2023 there was an altercation in between the husband of the informant and the applicant and in the said altercation, both of them had a fight in which the accused hit the husband of the informant with a Belcha and rod which resulted in substantial injuries and death. Antemortem injuries, as per the postmortem report, are lacerated wound on the forehead and top of the head, and abrasion injuries on the face and chest.

¶14

5. In the light of the said, submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that it was a case of sudden provocation arising out of a petty dispute in between the brothers. The applicant is in custody since 15.09.2023 and has no criminal antecedents. It is argued that two witnesses have been examined so far out of the total 18 witnesses.

¶15

BAIL No. 4078 of 2024

¶16

2

¶17

6. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

¶18

7. Considering the submissions made at the Bar, in terms of the FIR also a dispute arose on account of a petty dispute which resulted in altercation and thereafter a fight, thus, prima-facie, the premeditated intent is apparently missing. Hence, in view of the said facts coupled with the fact that only two witnesses out of the total 18 witnesses have been examined so far and there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future, as such, the applicant who has no criminal antecedents and is in custody since 15.09.2023, is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed .

¶19

8. Let the applicant Ranjeet be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:

¶20

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶21

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶22

(c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶23

(Pankaj Bhatia,J.)

¶24

December 2, 2025

¶25

nishant

¶26

Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ranjeet v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeet v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rahul Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Shiv Raj vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Vasudev and Ors. vs State of Uttar Pradesh through Collector Gonda and Ors.

Udairaj Harijan @ Udai vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Vikas vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Suresh Chandra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko.