Allowed¶12

Narendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Jul 2025BAIL/15070/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Ashutosh Srivastava, J.), Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:111319, order dated 10.7.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15070 of 2025: bail allowed under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 to applicant Narendra in Case Crime No. 49 of 2024, Sections 302, 201 IPC, P.S. Fatehpur, District Agra; earlier rejection by Sessions Judge, Agra dated 07.04.2025; parity with co-accused Jeetu @ Jetay @ Jitendra (bail order dated 17.06.2025 in Bail Application No. 19358 of 2025); ante-mortem drowning; applicant not named in FIR; release on personal bond with two sureties and conditions.

What did the court decide?

Enlargement on bail of accused-applicant Narendra on executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the conditions stated in the order; breach entitles the court below to cancel bail.

Narendra Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether accused-applicant Narendra should be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 49 of 2024, under Sections 302, 201 IPC, Police Station Fatehpur, District Agra.

¶7

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances, nature of accusations, severity of punishment, nature of supporting evidence, apprehension of tampering with witnesses and prima facie case, but without commenting on the merits, a case for bail is made out.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

Bail application allowed; applicant Narendra to be released on bail on executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (no tampering with evidence, no criminal activity, no pressurizing/intimidating prosecution witnesses, regular appearance before the trial court); on breach of any condition the court below may proceed to cancel bail.

¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted (Section 483, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) — Case Crime No. 49 of 2024, Sections 302, 201 IPC, P.S. Fatehpur, District Agra — applicant Narendra not named in the FIR; his name surfaced during investigation in the complainant's statement; alleged connection limited to being brother of co-accused Ashiq @ Umendra @ Kumendra and telephonic talk with co-accused Jeetu @ Jitendra — post-mortem of deceased Tanveer opined cause of death as asphyxia due to ante-mortem drowning — bail of Sessions Judge, Agra (order dated 07.04.2025) — applicant in jail since 17.04.2025 — parity urged with co-accused Jeetu @ Jetay @ Jitendra, already enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench by order dated 17.06.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19358 of 2025 — bail allowed without commenting on merits, on personal bond and two reliable sureties each, with conditions against tampering, criminal activity and intimidation of witnesses and requiring regular trial attendance; breach empowers court below to cancel bail.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:111319

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15070 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Narendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Pankaj Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.K. Rai, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

¶7

This bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been moved on behalf of accusedapplicant, Narendra, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 49 of 2024, under Sections 302, 201 IPC, Police StationFatehpur, District- Agra. The bail application of the applicant in the court below was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Agra, vide order dated 07.04.2025 and the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.04.2025.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accusedapplicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per the FIR, the marriage of daughter of informant, namely, Jumatan @ Munni was married with the brother of the applicant namely Ashiq @ Umendra @ Kumendra about three years ago and from their wedlock a son namely Tanveer was born, who were killed by his son-in-law, Ashiq @ Umendra and his body was thrown in canal. As per the post mortem report of deceased Tanveer, the Medical Officer opined that the cause of death due to Asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem drowning. From perusal of FIR as well as statement of witnesses no offence under Sections 302, 201 IPC is made out against the applicant. Applicant is not named in the FIR and there is no allegation for committing murder of the deceased. The name of the applicant has surfaced during investigation in the statement of complainant. The applicant has been implicated in the present case due to reason that he has brother of co-accused Ashiq @ Umendra @ Kumendra and on the day of incident he was telephonic talk with the co-accused Jeetu @

¶9

Jitendra. It is further submitted that similarly placed co-accused Jeetu @ Jetay @ Jitendra has already been enlarged on bail of by coordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 17.06.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19358 of 2025, copy of the bail order has been produced before the Court, which is taken on record. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused, Jeetu @ Jetay @ Jitendra, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. He has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶10

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the accused-applicant, Narendra involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶14

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶15

ii. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶16

iii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶17

iv. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶18

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶19

Order Date :- 10.7.2025 v.k.updh.

¶20

Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Narendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narendra v. State of U.P.

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