Radheyshyam Mushar vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44298 of 2025

Radheyshyam Mushar

	Versus .....	Applicant(s)
State of U.P.		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Piyush Patel, Pradeep	Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 64

¶6

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri S.S.Pandey, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶8

The present bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 225 of 2025, under Sections 333, 351(3), 352, 115(2) and 105 BNS, Police Station Nichlaul, District Maharajganj during the pendency of trial.

¶9

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the first information report, the applicant along with two named co-accused is alleged to have assaulted the husband of the informant. The husband of the informant succumbed to the injuries on the same day. According to the postmortem report, the deceased sustained four injuries. The injuries no. 1, 2 and 4 are on non vital parts of the body. The injury no.3 was on the head. In the opinion of the doctor, the cause of death is coma due to antemortem head injury. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused the head injury to the deceased. The applicant is in jail since 13.08.2025 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶10

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶11

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this

¶12

BAIL No. 44298 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

Court prima facie finds that as per the first information report, the applicant along with two named co-accused is alleged to have assaulted the husband of the informant. The husband of the informant succumbed to the injuries on the same day. According to the postmortem report, the deceased sustained four injuries. The injury nos. 1, 2, and 4 were on non vital parts of the body. The injury no.3 was on the head. In the opinion of the doctor the cause of death is coma due to antemortem head injury. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused the head injury to the deceased. 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.

¶15

Let the applicant Radheyshyam Mushar, 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:

¶16