Roop Kishor vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36710 of 2025

Roop Kishor

.....Applicant(s)

Versus
State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kamal Kishor Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 64

¶7

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

¶8

Pursuant to the order dated 30.10.2025, Ms. Shweta Verma, Circle Officer, Refinery, Mathura and Sri Umesh Kumar, Inspector, P.S. Highway, District Mathura are present before this Court along with the case diary.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anupam Anand, learned brief holder for the State-respondent.

The present bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 585 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 352, 105 BNS, Police Station Highway, District Mathura during the pendency of trial.

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. In the first information report, seven named accused including the applicant and an unknown person are nominated. As per the statement of the witnesses namely Km. Manisha and Yogesh, the applicant is alleged to have only abused and assaulted the deceased. Further, the statement of two witnesses Yogesh and Rajesh also indicates that during the scuffle, the hand of the deceased accidentally came in contact with a live wire, leading to electrocution. It is next contended that there is no intention to cause the death of Mansuka. The applicant is in jail since 24.06.2025 having no criminal history and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

BAIL No. 36710 of 2025

2

dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that as per the statement of the witnesses namely Km. Manisha and Yogesh, the applicant is alleged to have only abused and assaulted the deceased. The statement of two witnesses Yogesh and Rajesh also indicates that during the scuffle, the hand of the deceased accidentally came in contact with a live wire, leading to electrocution. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than four months and after submission of charge sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Let the applicant Roop Kishor, involved in the aforesaid case 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 subject to the conditions that he:

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.