Sameep Bhalla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25117

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3676 of 2025

Applicant :- Sameep Bhalla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Karuna Shanker Rastogi

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ankit Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Diwakar Singh, learned A.G.A-I. for the State, Sri Karuna Shankar Rastogi, learned counsel for the informant and perused the records.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 209 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3),190/115(2)/103(1)/109(1)/351(3) BNS (erstwhile Sections 147/148/149/323/302/307/506 IPC) registered at Police Station Kotwali Sadar, District Lakhimpur Kheri.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 11.03.2025 against (i) Anmol Puri @ Bala, (ii) five unnamed accomplices and (iii) user of mobile no. 6394543307, stating that while the informant was sitting at his shop at 7.20 P.M., Himanshu Mishra told him that the informant's son Dev Seth was coming with his friend Dhruv on a scooty to the shop. The accused persons were beating him in front of Pushpa Book Depot. The informant went to the spot along with Deepak Gupta and saw the accused persons brandishing pistols. On exhortation of the applicant and Aditya Kashyap, who were present at the shop, the named accused Anmol Puri shot at the chest of his son with intention to kill him. The other accused persons also fired shots which hit in the hand of Aaditya Kashyap. Thereafter all the accused persons

¶9

ran away.

¶10

The postmortem examination report mentions a fire arm entry wound over left side front of chest and a fire arm exit wound over right side back of chest and the cause of death has been opined to be shock and hemorrhage as a result of ante mortem fire arm injuries.

¶11

A copy of relevant extract of case diary has been annexed with the bail application wherein the Investigating Officer has recorded after perusing a CCTV footage that the deceased came on a scooty, the accused persons tried to stop the scooty and push it down, a gun shot can be heard and the accused persons can be seen running away. There is no mention that the applicant had fired the gun shot or assaulted anyone.

¶12

The applicant has surrendered to custody on 19.03.2025.

¶13

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is a young man aged 20 years having no criminal history and he is pursuing a B.A. course.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail application and they have submitted that all the accused persons have killed a young man in broad day light in the midst of a market. The offence committed by them is heinous, therefore the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶15

Learned counsel for the informant has also objected against the bail application on the ground that although in para-19 of the affidavit it has been stated that the investigation of the present case is still pending and a charge-sheet has not been filed till date, copies of statements recorded during investigation have been annexed with the bail application

¶16

whereas the same could not have been accessed to by the applicant. He has submitted that the aforesaid facts indicates that the applicant is influencing the investigation.

¶17

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the aforesaid documents were annexed with the bail application of the co-accused Utkarsh Singh and the same have been provided by the Pairokar of the co-accused person.

¶18

Co-accused Utkarsh Singh has been granted bail by means of an order dated 29.04.2025 passed by this court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.3609 of 2025.

¶19

Learned A.G.A. has that the applicant has been seen running away from the spot after the occurrence in perusal of the CCTV footage.

¶20

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the role of firing has been assigned to the named accused persons in the FIR; the CCTV footage does not show the applicant committing any illegal/overt act; the applicant is a young man aged 20 years having no criminal history and he is pursuing BA course and is languishing in jail since 19.03.2025 and a co-accused has already been granted bail, without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, 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.

¶21

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶22

Let the applicant- Sameep Bhalla 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 magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶23