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

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.332 of 2024, under Sections 3(5), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 118(1), 103(1), 333, 351(3), 117(2) of BNS and Section 7 of C.L.A. Act, P.S. Bhira, District Lakhimpur Kheri.

¶12

It is alleged in the prosecution case that on 02.08.2024 at about 8 PM the cousin brother Aman Pratap Singh and his younger brother Lokendra Pratap Singh had gone to drive the animals from the field situated east side of village. The said animals entered in to the house of the Santram who lived in the neighborhood, due to which Santram got anger and started beating his cousin brother and younger brother and on seeing, his father Ramjeet Singh and his father's friend Ramlakhan Singh @ Guddu started stopping Santaram then all the accused armed with Lathi and Sharp-edged weapon in hands, attacked his father and Ramlakhan Singh @ Guddu and committed murder of them by hitting on their head by lathi and entered his house and beat his mother Sudha Singh, uncle Haripal Singh, Aman Singh, Lokendra Pratap Singh, Soni Singh, Suman Singh, Ramdev Singh and him with lathi and seriously injured them, after the incident he taken away the injured to the C.H.C Bijua where they referred to Trauma Centre Oyal and there his father Ramjeet Singh and Ramlakhan Singh @ Guddu were referred from the

¶13

BAIL No. 13336 of 2024

¶14

2

¶15

District Hospital Lakhimpur to Trauma Centre Lucknow where they died.

¶16

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although 27 accused persons are named for causing injury and committing the murder of two deceased persons however, no specific role has been assigned to anyone neither any motive is assigned to the applicant. Post mortem of deceased Ramjeet Singh was conducted at KGMU wherein three ante mortem injuries have been found. Cause of death is Coma due to ante mortem head injury, viscera was preserved. Likewise, in the post mortem of deceased Ram Balak four ante mortem injuies were found. Cause of death is Coma due to ante mortem head injury. Post mortem report is on record. Four persons are alleged to have injured. All injured have received simple injuries. Injury reports are on record. Ramdev Singh injured was also medically examined who sustained four injuries and injury No.2 was referred for x-ray.

¶17

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that one of the injured Ramdev Singh has stated that on hearing the above incident, he reached on the spot and he saw the accused persons Santram, Raj Kumar, Mayaram, Ram Gopal, Ashok son of Rajaram were beating the deceased by lathi and sword. Not only Ramdev Singh but also all other injured and witnesses of prosecution have taken name of Ashok. There were two Ashok one is Ashok son of Rajaram who was named by the injured persons and another is Ashok son of Balakram. There is no dispute regarding the identity of Ashok son of Rajaram who was involved in the incident. The Investigating Officer ignoring the statement of injured dropped the name of Ashok son of Rajaram and implicated the applicant only because his name ignoring the name of the father. The conduct off the Investigating Officer is disturbing. General role has been assigned to 27 persons, the presence of the applicant at the place of occurrence is disputed in view of the statement of the injured Ramdev Singh. There is no recovery from the applicant. It is next submitted that the coaccused Ashok Kumar has already been granted bail by a coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 12.9.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 921 of 2025. Hence, the present applicant claims parity.

¶18

It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 13.8.2024. Charge-sheet in the case has been filed. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released

¶19

BAIL No. 13336 of 2024

¶20

3

¶21

from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶22

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer however, could not give any reply as to how the name of Ashok son of Rajaram has been dropped by the Investigating Officer although he was named by the injured.

¶23

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record, bail order of the co-accused Ashok Kumar, the statement of the injured Ramdev Singh so also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 13.8.2024 having no criminal history, charge-sheet in the case has been filed, co-accused, referred to above, has been granted bail, general role has been assigned to all the accused persons and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail on the ground of parity.

¶24

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶25

Let the applicant Maya Ram be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

¶26

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶27

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶28

(iii) 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.

¶29

(iv) 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.

¶30

BAIL No. 13336 of 2024

¶31

4

¶32

(v) 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 Panel Code (now Section 269 of BNS).

¶33

(vi) 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. (now Section 84 BNSS) 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 Panel Code (now Section 209 BNS).

¶34

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶35

September 16, 2025 kkb/

¶36

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Maya Ram v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maya Ram v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

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

Mukesh Chauhan @ Lavkush Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Ramesh Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Pragyesh Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Aviation, Lko. and Another

Chand Kumar @ Kallu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Suraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow