Dismissed¶12

Arvind v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Sept 2025BAIL/32652/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court; bail application rejected/dismissed; applicant Arvind; Case Crime No. 183 of 2025; Sections 109 (1), 110, 115(2) BNS; Police Station Inchauli, District Meerut; grievous injury caused by hammer blow to head of informant's mother; medical report dated 31.07.2024; prosecution version corroborated by statements of informant and injured and by medical examination report; bench: Hon'ble Vivek Varma, J. (Court No. 64); decided December 1, 2025; Hemant Kumar counsel for applicant; G.A. and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma (AGA) for State-opposite party; observations without bearing on merits; expeditious conclusion of trial urged; decided during pendency of trial.

What did the court decide?

None; bail denied - the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail was rejected and the applicant was not enlarged on bail. ¶12

Arvind vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; bail denied - the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail was rejected and the applicant was not enlarged on bail.

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, Arvind, should be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 183 of 2025 under Sections 109 (1), 110, 115(2) BNS, Police Station Inchauli, District Meerut, during the pendency of the trial.

¶8

Court's answer

Prima facie, as per the first information report, the specific role of causing injury on the head of the mother of the informant by hammer has been assigned to the applicant.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

As per the medical report dated 31.07.2024, the injury suffered by the mother of the informant was found to be grievous in nature.

¶11

Key takeaways

The prosecution version is supported by the statements of the informant and the injured, and the medical examination report corroborates the prosecution case.ratio¶11
On the foregoing prima facie findings, the bail application is rejected.ratio¶12
Passing observation: the trial court should endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously.obiter

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail application rejected - Allahabad High Court (Hon'ble Vivek Varma, J., Court No. 64), Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 32652 of 2025, decided December 1, 2025: Application of Arvind for enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 183 of 2025, under Sections 109 (1), 110, 115(2) BNS, Police Station Inchauli, District Meerut, during the pendency of the trial, was rejected. The Court prima facie found, on the first information report, that the specific role of causing injury on the head of the mother of the informant by hammer had been assigned to the applicant; the injury was grievous in nature as per the medical report dated 31.07.2024; the prosecution version was supported by the statements of both the informant and the injured and was corroborated by the medical examination report. It was clarified that the observations in the order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case, and the trial court was to endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously. Counsel for the applicant: Hemant Kumar; for the opposite party: G.A. (Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA, represented the State at hearing).

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32652 of 2025

¶3

Arvind

¶4

	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Hemant Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 64

¶6

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State-opposite party.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 183 of 2025, under Sections 109 (1), 110, 115(2) BNS, Police Station Inchauli, District Meerut during the pendency of the trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is in jail since 31.07.2024 having no criminal history.

¶10

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, the Court prima facie finds that as per the first information report, specific role of causing injury on the head of the mother of the informant by hammer has been assigned to the applicant. As per the medical report dated 31.07.2024, the injury was found grievous in nature. The prosecution version is supported by the statement of both informant and injured and the medical examination report corroborates the prosecution case.

¶12