Mukesh vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39642 of 2025

Mukesh

.....Applicant(s)

Versus
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Meva Lal Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 66

¶6

HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

¶7

1. List revised.

¶8

Heard Sri Meva Lal Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶9

This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Mukesh, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 201 of 2025, under Section 105 B.N.S., registered at Police Station Jaitipur, District Shahjahanpur.

¶10

The FIR of the matter was lodged on 31.08.2025 by Netrapal against the applicant and Harjeet alleging therein that construction work was going on wherein his son Mool Chandra used to work with Mukesh and Harjeet at linter laying machine. In the evening at about 05:30 pm the machine was to be transported on the first floor wherein Mukesh and Harjeet pushed his brother Mool Chandra from the roof and fell down and received injuries. Report be lodged and action be taken.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the present case is a case of an accident in which Mool Chandra fell down from the roof and received injuries and died. It is submitted that the applicant has no motive to commit the aforesaid offence. It is submitted that the FIR has been lodged after inordinate delay of about four days. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 21 of the affidavit and is in jail since 01.09.2025.

¶12

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that Rinku an independent witness is given specific role of pushing the deceased Mool Chandra from the first floor to Mukesh the present applicant and Harjeet.

¶13

BAIL No. 39642 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the FIR has been lodged after four days of the incident for which there is no plausible explanation for the same. Construction work is going on wherein the deceased fell down from the first floor and received injuries and died.

¶16

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶17

Let the applicant Mukesh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶18

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶19

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶20

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶21

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS, 2023.

¶22

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS, 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 BNS, 2023.

¶23

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶24

BAIL No. 39642 of 2025

¶25

3

¶26

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶27

The bail application is allowed .

¶28

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶29

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶30

November 19, 2025 M. ARIF

¶31

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mukesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh 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

Similar cases

Acchu vs State of U.P.

Vipin Kumar vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home Gov. of U.P. at Lucknow

Smt. Sushila vs State of U.P.

Prashant Kumar Pal vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sudheer vs State of U.P.

Saleem Alias Sajid Ali vs State of U.P.