Mahasingh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Mahasingh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail granted: applicant Mahasingh to be released in FIR No. 309 of 2024 on furnishing a personal bond with one surety of Rs.10,000 to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (a) undertaking to attend hearings, (b) not committing any similar offence, and (c) not making any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts so as to dissuade disclosure to the Court/police or tamper with evidence.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Mahasingh, accused in FIR No. 309 of 2024 under sections 103(1), P.S. Baghauli, District Hardoi, is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Court's answer

Premeditated intent is not evident from the statements and the FIR allegations; the court refrained from commenting upon the merits of the case.

Ratio / Principle

Since the applicant has been in jail since 5.9.2024 and has no criminal history, he is entitled to be enlarged on bail, and the bail application is allowed.

Key takeaways

The applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with one surety of Rs.10,000 to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions that he shall attend hearings, shall not commit any similar offence, and shall not directly or indirectly induce, threaten or promise any person acquainted with the facts so as to dissuade disclosure or tamper with evidence.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BAIL GRANTED — Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Court No. 12), Pankaj Bhatia, J., decided Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4237 of 2025 on December 3, 2025. Applicant Mahasingh sought enlargement on bail in FIR No. 309 of 2024, under sections 103(1) (enactment not named in the judgment text), P.S. Baghauli, District Hardoi, relating to the death of the informant's son who was struck with a 'banka' while using his mobile phone; cause of death per post-mortem was abrasion on right side of neck and contusion injuries on the back of the deceased at C-5 and C-6. Counsel urged provocation, alleging the deceased and other boys used to sit in front of the applicant's house and misbehave with his wife. The court found that premeditated intent was not evident from the statements and the FIR allegations, expressly declined to comment on the merits, and — noting custody since 5.9.2024 and absence of criminal history — held the applicant entitled to bail. He was ordered released on a personal bond with one surety of Rs.10,000, subject to standard conditions (attendance at hearings; no similar offences; no inducement, threat, promise or tampering with witnesses/evidence).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4237 of 2025

Mahasingh

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

			.....Opp Par	osite ty(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Afrin Bano, Yadav	Deepansi,	Mangal	Sen
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 12

HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J.

1. Heard Ms Afrin Bano and Ms Deepansi, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No. 309 of 2024, under sections 103(1), P.S. Baghauli, District Hardoi.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that in terms of FIR it was alleged that son of informant aged about 24 years was sitting with some boys and was using mobile phone when the applicant came with banka and hit him which resulted in substantial injuries and subsequent death and thereafter the applicant ran away. Cause of death as per post mortem report is abrasion on right side on neck and contusion injury on back of deceased at C-5 and C-6. In the light of the said allegations learned counsel for the applicant submits that all the boys used to sit on front of home of the applicant and misbehave with wife and on account of provocation and anger the applicant allegedly hit the deceased which resulted in in his death. Statement of the eye witness support the prosecution story.

4. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

5. Considering the fact that the premeditated intent is not evident from statements and the FIR allegations, however, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the applicant who is in jail since 5.9.2024 and has

BAIL No. 4237 of 2025

2

no criminal history is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

6. Let the applicant Mahasingh be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with one surety of Rs.10,000/to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

(c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(Pankaj Bhatia,J.)

December 3, 2025

J. K. Dinkar

Digitally signed by :- JESHU KUMAR DINKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench