Karan Alias Kendu vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:59933

Court No. - 68

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3912 of 2025

Applicant :- Karan Alias Kendu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Yagyavalk Pandey, learned AGA for the State and perused the entire material available on record.

¶7

This is the second bail application filed by the applicant. The first bail application filed by the present applicant has been dismissed by this Bench with liberty to file a fresh bail application with better particulars, vide order dated 22.01.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 39672 of 2024 (Karan @ Kendu Vs. State of U.P.), a copy of which has been brought on record as Annexure-1 to the bail application.

¶8

The applicant- Karan |@ Kendu, has filed this second bail application with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No. 207 of 2024, under Sections 191 (2), 191 (3), 109, 118 (1) BNS, Police Station Arniya, District Bulandshahr, during the pendency of the trial.

¶9

The allegation made in the FIR is that on 24.07.2024 at about 8:30 p.m. the applicant along with other co-accused persons entered into the house of injured Lokesh Singh and Kapil Singh and assaulted them with knife and lathi - danda , in which both of them have sustained grievous injury.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accusedapplicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this case crime number and is languishing in jail since 30.08.2024. He has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the the incident took place on 24.07.2024 at about 8:30 p.m. and its FIR was lodged on 25.07.2024 at 13:16 hours without giving any explanation for delay in lodging the FIR. No motive has been assigned to the applicant and in absence of any strong motive applicant has no occasion to commit the aforesaid crime. It is

¶11

submitted that the informant has not seen the incident. He was informed by his wife and by that time the injured persons were already taken to hospital, then he reached to his house where he was informed about the incident. Neither any specific role has been assigned to the applicant for causing injury to any injured nor any specific weapon has been assigned to him. It is next submitted that the injuries sustained by the injured were not dangerous to life. It is further submitted that the medical examination report of the injured does not support the prosecution case and prima facie the FIR does not disclose any offence against the applicant. No direct or indirect evidence against the applicant to connect the crime in question, which shows that the applicant did not commit any conspiracy in the present case. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶12

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶13

Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶15

Let the accused-applicant, Karan @ Kendu, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶16

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶17

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶18

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶19

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶20

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶21

Order Date :- 1.4.2025 v.k.updh.

¶22

Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Karan Alias Kendu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karan Alias Kendu 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rita Singh vs Smt. Raj Kishori Devi and 6 Others

Niranjan vs Neeraj Kumar and 6 Others

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Smt. Pooja and 6 Others

Anup Mishra @ Anup Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Kumar Singh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Rohitash Kumar Alias Pintu vs State of U.P. and Another