Rajendra Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

The present third bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in case crime no.381 of 2020, under sections – 147, 148, 149, 302 IPC, registered at police station – Para, District – Lucknow with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the incident occurred on 17.7.2020 and from the place of occurrence three empty cartridges of .315 bore and three empty cartridges of .32 bore and on the shell of 7.65 KF were recovered and one piece of big bullet and three pieces of small bullets were also recovered.

¶14

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that he was arrested on 18.7.2020 and from his possession one countrymade pistol with magazine (with one live cartridge) mark of KF 7.86 was recovered and the pistol was numbered 1/2022 and in the FSL report dated 09.02.2022 it is mentioned that 'deshi' pistol 7.65 mm was opened in the bundle at Laboratory and the same was put for test of matching with empty shell, recovered from the spot and also with big bullet.

¶15

Finding has been given by the FSL report dated 09.02.2022 that empty cartridge 7.65 mm was not matched with the firearm recovered from the applicant (firearm marked 1/2022).

¶16

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that out of five accused persons two have been granted bail by the Sessions Judge, Lucknow and he has submitted that the other two co-accused persons Gaurav Verma and Shivam Verma have also been granted bail by the coordinate benches of this Court vide order dated 13.02.2024 and 19.6.2025 and has submitted that petitioner is also entitled for bail. He has submitted that more than five years have passed and the applicant is in jail, therefore, on the ground of incarceration also he is also entitled for bail. He has submitted that there is long list of 24 witnesses got to be examined which would take much time.

¶17

BAIL No. 5677 of 2025

¶18

2

¶19

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail and has submitted that this Court while rejecting the second bail application has considered the argument that the applicant is named in the FIR and further the argument that the complainant PW-1, mother of the deceased PW – 2, sister of the deceased PW – 3 and relative of the deceased PW – 4 have specified the role to the petitioner and role of assault has been levelled and it is a broad day light murder, therefore, this is not a fit stage that the applicant may be granted bail.

¶20

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, argument that PW-1 to PW-4 have assigned the role of assault to the applicant and it is a broad day light murder, it is not a fit case that bail should be granted at this stage and, hence, the same is rejected.

¶21

October 10, 2025 mks

¶22

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MANISH SAXENA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rajendra Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shiv Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Mohammad Ibraheem Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Pankaj Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Ram Achhaibar vs the State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Rakesh Agarwal vs Union of India, Thru. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Tds Lko.

Anil Kumar Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another