Kailashnath Shukla vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:16513

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2755 of 2025

Applicant :- Kailashnath Shukla Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Srivastava,Manoj Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Ankit Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶8

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 269 of 2024, under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 352, 324(4), 351(3), 127(2), 103(1) BNS, Police Station- Barsathi, District- Jaunpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶9

FIR of the present case was lodged on 27.09.2024 against applicant and 13 others and according to FIR, on 26.09.2024 at about 5:00 p.m. in the evening a religious function was going on in the house of the applicant and in the religious ceremony when informant and her husband (son of the applicant) tried to participate then applicant and other accused persons made assault upon them and thereafter when information was given to the police then police has taken the husband of the informant to the hospital, where he has been declared dead.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is father of the deceased and on the basis of false allegation, he has been made accused in the present matter.

¶11

He further submitted that in the present matter, applicant along with as many as 13 others was made accused including his sons, daughters and even his wife and, therefore, prima facie it appears to be a case of over implication.

¶12

He further submitted that being father of the deceased, applicant was having no occasion to commit his murder and it appears some

¶13

dispute of deceased arose with his brothers and thereafter during scuffling, he sustained injuries and died and as his relationship with the informant side was not cordial one, therefore, informant implicated the applicant and 13 others.

¶14

He further submitted that post-mortem report of the deceased suggests that he sustained only two injuries on his vital part.

¶15

He further submitted that the applicant is about 70 years' old and a specific averment in this regard has been made by the applicant in paragraph no. 21 of the affidavit.

¶16

He further submitted that, however, apart from the present case, a NCR was lodged against the applicant but that case relates to minor offence.

¶17

He further submitted that in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 29.09.2024.

¶18

Per contra, learned AGA, however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶19

I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶20

From the record it reflects that applicant is father of the deceased and as per allegation, he along with other accused persons, who were total 13 in number, made assault upon his son i.e. deceased and due to assault made by them, he sustained injuries and died but it reflects that only general and omnibus allegations have been labelled against all the accused including applicant.

¶21

Further, considering the fact that applicant is father of the deceased and in the FIR, his entire family members have been made accused, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that actually it is a case of over implication, cannot be completely ruled out at this stage.

¶22

Further, however, post-mortem report of the deceased suggests that deceased sustained 6 injuries but except injury nos. 1 and 2, all the other injuries were on non-vital part and considering this fact, the submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that as the relationship between applicant side and informant side was not cordial, therefore, when deceased arrived at the house of

¶23

applicant then dispute arose between him and his brothers and during scuffling, he sustained injuries and died, cannot be completely ruled out at this stage.

¶24

Further, however apart from the present case, a NCR was also lodged against the applicant but admittedly that case relates to minor offence.

¶25

Further, in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 29.09.2024.

¶26

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶27

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶28

Let the applicant- Kailashnath Shukla be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶29

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶30

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶31

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶32

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶33

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶34

Order Date :- 5.2.2025 KK Patel

¶35

Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kailashnath Shukla v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kailashnath Shukla 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chimman Alias Kailash vs State of U.P.

Rekha Devi vs State of U.P. and 16 Others

Premvir vs State of U.P.

Pawan Nishad vs State of U.P.

Nishu Devi vs State of U.P.

Shivam Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another