Shiv Narayan Nai Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:21752

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7212 of 2024

Applicant :- Shiv Narayan Nai Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant as also Sri Devesh Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

This application has been filed seeking bail of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 117 of 2023 under Sections 302/307/34, I.P.C. and Section 27/30, Arms Act, P.S. Musafirkhana, District Amethi.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 10.08.2023 by the applicant’s wife against the applicant and his son stating that a dispute is going on between the applicant and the informant due to which she is residing at her parent’s place at Oonchgaon since 18.07.2023. The informant had gone to Musafirkhana alongwith her brother on 10.08.2023 for getting a mobile phone and while she was returning from there, the applicant and his son Ansh came on a motorcycle, stopped the motorcycle of the informant’s brother and shot at the informant and her brother causing serious injuries to both of them. The informant’s brother died on 22.10.2023.

¶9

In the statement of the informant recorded under Section 161, Cr.P.C. she stated that she had got married to the applicant in the year 1992. Gauna was performed in the year 1998. In the year 1999 the applicant got employed in C.R.P.F. The informant has given birth to three children. For the past one year the behaviour of her husband had changed. He had come to the informant’s parental home to attend Tilak Ceremony of her brother and he had left from there in anger. He threatened the informant that he would give divorce to her. After some time the applicant went to her matrimonial home, but the applicant kept on harassing and threatening her. On 18.07.2023 the

¶10

applicant with her daughter Sejal came to her parental home. On 10.08.2023 she had gone to Musafirkhana to get a mobile phone for her daughter, where suddenly she met her husband and son, who started forcibly dragging her to Lucknow. The informant resisted, whereupon the applicant started beating her. When the informant’s brother tried to save her, her husband had beaten him also. Some persons standing nearby intervened. Thereafter when she was going with her brother on a motorcycle, the applicant came there on a motorcycle, which was being driven by his son Ansh and after coming near the informant, the applicant fired from his licensee pistol causing two injuries to the informant and three to her brother. Thereafter, the informant and her brother were taken through an Ambulance to C.H.C. Musafirkhana and her daughter also came there. The informant told her about the incident, who wrote a complaint, which was signed by the informant. Thereafter, the doctors referred the informant’s brother to Sultanpur and, in turn, he was referred to Trauma Center Lucknow. The informant was discharged after treatment on 11.03.2023. At the time of recording this statement, the brother of the informant was undergoing treatment in Trauma Center, Lucknow, where he died on 22.10.2023.

¶11

The Medico-Legal Examination report of the informant mentions three injuries caused by some firearm pellets.

¶12

The Medico-Legal Examination report of the informant’s brother mentions a circular wound of diameter 5.00 cm. muscle deep over right side of back and a circular lacerated wound of size 6.00 cm. X 4.00 cm. over right side of abdomen and the injury was caused by a close range firearm.

¶13

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history.

¶14

A copy of the statement of the informant’s daughter recorded by the investiating officer has been annexed as Annexure-10 to the application, wherein she reiterated the informant’s version.

¶15

The State has filed a counter-affidavit annexing therewith a copy of the statement recorded under Section 161, Cr.P.C., a copy of the postmortem report, a copy of the recovery memo

¶16

and a copy of the chargesheet. The recovery memo mentions that a .32 bore licenced pistol with 4 live cartridges, a .32 bore illegal pistol with 5 cartridges were recovered from the applicant and a 12 bore DBBL gun with 39 cartridges were recovered from the applicant’s son/co-accused Ansh. Some jewellery and Rs. 3,47,700.00 cash were also recovered from the motorcycle of the applicant.

¶17

In the custodial statement, the applicant confessed having given effect to the incident and thereafter a chargesheet was submitted against both the accused persons on 05.11.2023.

¶18

A copy of the statement of the informant recorded by the trial court has been brought on record, as Annexure R.A.-2, annexed to the rejoinder affidavit, wherein the informant has reiterated her earlier version.

¶19

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the informant is the wife of the applicant and she had herself suffered gun shot injuries in the incident, prima facie, there appears no possibility of any confusion in identifying the persons involved in commission of offence.

¶20

Keeping in view the nature of allegations, I am of the view that the present case does not warrant exercise of discretion of this court by enlarging the applicant on bail. The bailapplication is accordingly rejected .

¶21

( Subhash Vidyarthi, J. )

¶22

Order Date :- 17.4.2025 A.Nigam

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shiv Narayan Nai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Narayan Nai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Manish Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Umesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Koyali @ Rehana @ Khalikun Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Jaikesh Pal @ Jagesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Sri Jitendra Maurya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Parmanand Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Govt. of U.P. Lko.