Aryan Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8502

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4782 of 2024

Applicant :- Aryan Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Shubhranshu Verma,Ajay Singh,Sakshi Singh,Sameer Singh

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sayyed Farooq Ahmad

¶6

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Syed. Farooq Ahmad, learned counsel for the complainant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 298 of 2023, under Sections 504, 506, 307 IPC, Police Station Mahrajganj, District Ayodhya (Faizabad).

¶9

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits the role assigned to the applicant is of opening firing, though the injuries are not on vital part of the body of injured. He has drawn attention towards injury report and added that opinion of doctor is that injury is caused by hard and blunt object and subsequently, it was got written in bracket as 'gun shot'. Further submission is that recovery memo/search memo, at page no. 24 of the bail application, is evident that no filled bullet or cartridge etc. were recovered, whereas the fact remains that the fire was opened inside the vehicle. He next added that the injury report itself demolishes the prosecution story, as this is, prima facie, no case of attempt to murder. He added that the story is concocted and due to animosity, the name of the applicant has been planted. Further submission is that the chargesheet has been filed and all the witnesses of facts have been examined before the trial court, therefore, there is no possibility that the applicant would threaten them. Further submission is that the applicant has four cases criminal history which have been explained and he is languishing in jail since 14.10.2023. He next added that marriage of the sister of the applicant is scheduled to be held day after tomorrow i.e. on 12.02.2025. Further submission is that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted and would cooperate in the trial proceedings, thus, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the First Information Report and he has specifically been assigned the role of opening fire and the injured has also received injuries. He next submits that the coaccused, who have already been enlarged on bail, have not been assigned the role of firing and the applicant has four cases criminal history and as such, he is not entitled for any relief.

¶11

Learned AGA appearing for the State has also supported the version of learned counsel for the complainant and submits that the applicant has four cases criminal history and after thorough investigation, he was found to be involved in committing the offence and chargesheet has been filed in the matter, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.

¶12

Having considered the submissions of learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of the record, it transpires that the injury report itself demolishes the prosecution story as the perusal of injury report it transpires that it cannot be said to be a case of attempt to commit murder and further the injuries are not on vital part of the body of the injured and admittedly, no bullet, pellets or cartridge etc. were recovered, as per recovery memo/search memo; the applicant has four cases criminal history which has been explained and all the witnesses of facts have been examined by the trial court, therefore, there seems to be no possibility that the applicant would threaten them, coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 14.10.2023 and marriage of his sister is fixed on 12.02.2025 and the applicant has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶13

Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

¶14

Let the applicant- Aryan Singh involved in the aforementioned crime 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, with the following conditions:-

¶15

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, or

¶16

otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶17

(2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶18

(3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and

¶19

(4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

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

¶21

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶22

Let a certified copy of this order be provided to learned counsel for the applicant today itself on payment of usual charges.

¶23

Order Date :- 10.2.2025 kkv/

¶24

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

Aryan Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aryan Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Imran Vs State of U.P.Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Alok Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Home Civil Secretariat Lko.

Brijendra Kumar Alias Vijendra Kumar Srivastava vs State O Fu.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Rajesh Kumar Yadav @ Rajesh Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Shiva Arya @ Raja vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Home Secy. Lko. and 3 Others