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

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:28205

Court No. - 29

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2154 of 2025

Applicant :- Abhishek Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Lalji Prasad Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in FIR No.16 of 2024, under Sections 323, 504, 304 IPC, Police Station Sidhauli, District Sitapur.

¶8

The learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court towards impugned FIR, wherein the allegation of beating, torturing and assault has been levelled against three accused persons, including the present applicant. After completion of investigation, the police has filed Final Report in favour of the daughter of the present applicant. It has further been submitted that the chargesheet has been filed against the present applicant including other co-accused persons, therefore, there is no chance that the applicant would tamper the evidences.

¶9

As per medical report the victim sustained two ante mortem injuries, one being abrasion of 3.5 cm x 0.5 cm, present on lateral aspect of right side of neck, 4.5 cm below right ear, and the second injury being abrasion of 2.0 cm x 1.5 cm, present on back of right elbow joint. The victim also sustained perforation of size 2.4 cm x 2.0 cm present on colon and ecchymosis present around the wound. The cause of death is immediate shock as a result of colon perforation.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that there was no prior enmity between the families of the applicant and the victim or the informant and that the informant with ulterior motive in his mind lodged the impugned FIR after two days of the incident. The applicant has no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Chargesheet has also been filed against the

¶11

applicant. Therefore, if the present applicant is enlarged on bail, he undertakes that he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Learned AGA has opposed this bail application by submitting that the deceased was murdered brutally, therefore, this bail application may be rejected.

¶13

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material on record, wherein allegations have been levelled against the present applicant, his wife and his daughter, and final report has been filed against his daughter Julie and the fact that the applicant has no criminal history and chargesheet has also been filed against him and considering the fact that co-accused has already been enlarged on bail and the undertaking given by the applicant that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if granted to him and that he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶14

Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

¶15

Let the applicant- Abhishek involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, 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

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶17

(2) 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. He 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 Penal Code;

¶18

(3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before

¶19

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.; and

¶20

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

¶21

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶22

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶23

Order Date :- 14.5.2025 kkv/

¶24

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Brijesh Kumar Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Chief Secy., Govt. of U.P., Lko. and 3 Others

Vinod Kumar Verma and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Dr. Shaleen Chandra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Anotehr

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

Bablu @ Badlu Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Secy. Deptt. of Home Civil Secretariat Lko.and Another

Lal Singh @ Lalu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others