Durgesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11196

Court No. - 11

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10718 of 2024

Applicant :- Durgesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dr. Ajai Pratap Singh Chauhan,Anand Kumar Singh,Kunwar Samitinjay Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajeet Kumar Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh for informant/ complainant.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit, same is taken on record.

¶8

As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 24.05.2024 in Case Crime No.261 of 2024, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 354, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Section 3 (2)(v), 3 (2)(va), 3 (1) (dha) of SC/ST Act and Section 7/8 POSCO Act, Police Station Bilgram, District Hardoi.

¶9

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court towards impugned first information report which was lodged on 14.05.2024 at about 10.46 PM for the alleged incident occurred on 13.05.2024 at about 7.00 PM. In the impugned first information report, general allegations of assault and beating have been levelled against seven named accused persons and four un-known persons. The aforesaid general allegations of assault and beating have been levelled against all the accused persons. The present applicant has been falsely implicated only on account of village rivalry. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that allegation of one of the charging sections i.e. Section 354 I.P.C. has been levelled against the present applicant which is to the effect that applicant torn the cloth of minor girl of the informant and touched her inappropriately. As per the post-mortem report, the deceased sustained eight injuries and out of those injuries, three injuries are on vital part of the deceased. The cause of death of the deceased could not be ascertained therefore, viscera was preserved for Histopathological examination. Charge sheet has been filed. The applicant is having one criminal history which has been explained by the applicant in para 2 of the

¶10

supplementary affidavit. Further, the applicant undertakes that if he is released on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall co-operate in the trial proceedings.

¶11

The counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that co-accused Shravan Kumar @ Sarvan has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 6.2.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10464 of 2024 and on the basis of parity the applicant is also entitled for bail.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant/ complainant have opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that present applicant has not only assaulted the victim (since deceased) mercilessly but has committed offence which comes within the purview of Section 354 I.P.C. and Section 7/8 of Pocso Act therefore, this bail application be rejected.

¶13

Without entering into merits of the issue; considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; contents and allegations of the FIR; the fact that general allegations have been levelled against all the accused persons; no specific role of either assault or weapon of assault has been attributed to the present applicant; there is unexplained delay in lodging the FIR; co-accused, Shravan Kumar @ Sarvan has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 6.2.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10464 of 2024 and the undertaking of the applicant that he shall co-operate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶15

Let applicant- Durgesh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:-

¶16

(i) 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. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his

¶18

absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(iii) 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

(iv) 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.

¶21

(v) 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.

¶22

(vi) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

¶23

(vii) The applicant shall not try to meet the informant or shall not try to influence her in any manner whatsoever as she has lost her husband and is residing/living in the same village, failing which an appropriate application may be filed by the informant or her counsel seeking cancellation of bail.

¶24

Order Date :- 20.2.2025 Om

¶25

Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Durgesh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Durgesh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shivdayal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Dilip Pasi @ Dilip Kumar Bangali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Abhay Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Cooperative Lko. and Others

Pankaj Kumar Pathak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

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

Dileep Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.