Umesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:19736

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3498 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Umesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. Of Home

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar,Adarsh Kumar Maurya,Ambrish Kumar,Amit Kumar Awasthi,Chandra Prakash,Surendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramakar Shukla

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Amit Kumar Awasthi, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajeet Singh, the learned State Counsel, Sri Subodh Kumar Pandey, the learned counsel for the informant and perused the records.

¶8

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 21/2024, under Sections 304, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Sadar Sharda Nagar, District Lakhimpur Kheri.

¶9

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 03.02.2024 against six persons, including the applicant and his family members, stating that a property dispute was going on between the informant's father and the accused persons. Upon hearing some noise, the informant went out of his house at 04:30 a.m. on 03.02.2024 and he found that all the accused persons had assaulted on the head of the informant's father with intention of killing him. The applicant was holding a farsa in his hand with which he was assaulting the informant's father. The other persons were hurling abuses. The informant's father was taken to the

¶10

Community Health Centre, from where he was referred to the District Hospital where he was being treated. The post mortem examination report mentions a stitched wound 1 cm long on left side of fore head and underlying frontal bone was fractured. The cause of death has been opined to be septicemia as a result of ante mortem head injury. The victim died during treatment on 08.02.2024.

¶11

The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of statements recorded during investigation and a copy of the charge sheet dated 27.02.2024. Some independent witnesses have stated that the applicant was carrying a stick with which he has assaulted the deceased.

¶12

A rejoinder affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant annexing therewith a copy of the injury Form prepared in District Hospital, Lakhimpur Kheri on the date of incident i.e. 03.02.2024 which mentions two lacerated wounds on the head of the deceased. There was swelling on the head and the victim was bleeding from the nose. A copy of the relevant extract of case diary annexed with the rejoinder affidavit mentions that the information of death was given by a ward boy who stated that the victim was admitted to the District Hospital at 04:25 hours on 08.02.2024 and he died at 09:15 hours.

¶13

The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that from the aforesaid facts recorded in the case diary, it appears that although the victim had been referred from Community Health Centre to District Hospital on the date of incident i.e. 03.02.2024 itself, he was not taken to the District Hospital promptly due to which he could not receive proper treatment.

¶14

The informant has stated before the Investigating

¶15

Officer that after his father had been referred by the Community Health Centre to District Hospital, he was treated at the District Hospital, from where he was referred to KGMU, Lucknow. He has taken his father to the KGMU, Lucknow where he was kept for the entire night and thereafter in the morning he again took back his father to the District Hospital, Lakhimpur Kheri where he was being treated.

¶16

The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the fact recorded in the general diary that deceased was brought to the hospital at 04:25 a.m. on 08.02.2024 where he died during treatment at 09:15 hours indicating that the victim had been taken to his home during treatment and thereafter he was again brought to the hospital when he developed septicemia and ultimately the victim died due to septicemia.

¶17

The learned AGA has opposed the bail application and he has submitted that the allegations have been established during investigation and a charge sheet has been submitted thereafter.

¶18

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the FIR has been lodged by the deceased's son, who claimed to have witnessed the incident and he alleged that all the accused persons had assaulted his father and the applicant was carrying a farsa whereas the injury inflicted on the body of the deceased person is not relatable to the use of farsa; that subsequently the witnesses have changed the narration and stated that the applicant was carrying a stick; the incident took place at 04:30 a.m. on 03.02.2024, the victim was taken to the hospital from where he was referred to a higher centre and the case diary reveals that

¶19

the deceased was taken to the higher centre at 04:35 a.m. at 08.02.2024 and where he died at 09:15 a.m. on 08.02.2024; that it appears that the deceased was not taken to the higher centre promptly due to which septicemia spread in his body and while specifically observing that these observations would not affect the outcome of the trial, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

¶20

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶21

Let the applicant- Umesh be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶22

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶23

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶24

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶25

[Subhash Vidyarthi, J.]

¶26

Order Date :- 8.4.2025 Pradeep/-

¶27

Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Umesh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home

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

Mohd. Arif @ Anna Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

Kanchan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vikas Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Mohd. Adil Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Secrt. Lko.

Manmohan Singh @ Devansh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lucknow

Umesh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home