Shri Chandra Shukla and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:18006

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7466 of 2024

Applicant :- Shri Chandra Shukla And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Kr. Misra

¶6

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Baran Singh

¶7

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶8

Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the informant/ complainant, which is taken on record.

¶9

Heard Sri L. P. Mishra and Sri Alok Kumar Misra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ram Baran Singh, learned counsel for the informant/ complainant.

¶10

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 0107 of 2024, under Sections 302, 149 I.P.C., registered at Police StationVisheshwarganj, District- Bahraich.

¶11

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 04.04.2024 against seven persons, including the applicants, stating that the informant's father had gone to look after the wheat crop in his field situated 500 meters away from his residence in the night of 3/4.04.2024. All the accused persons assaulted him due to animosity regarding election of Gram Pradhan. When the informant received information of the incident and reached the spot, his father was lying on the cot and he told that the accused persons had beaten him with sticks. His bed was soiled with blood. He was taken to the Community Health Centre from where he was referred to the District Hospital, Bahraich where he died during treatment. The postmortem examination report mentions four stitches present over the right forehead and an abrasion over left knee and cause of death has been opined to be coma due to ante-mortem head injury.

¶12

The Investigating Officer claims to have recovered two sticks from the bushes near a dried canal on the pointing out of the applicants. The applicant and his mother have supported the FIR version in their statements recorded by the Investigating Officer.

¶13

In the affidavit filed in support of bail application, it has been stated that the applicants, who are real brothers, are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. In para 17 & 18 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, the involvement of the applicants in Case Crime No. 252 of 2022 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308 IPC, Police Station- Vesheswarganj, District Bahriaich has been disclosed in which the applicant No. 1 has been granted bail. In para 18, it has been stated that the applicants were implicated in another case bearing Case Crime No. 24 of 2019 in which the applicant No. 1 was exonerated by the Investigating Officer and the applicant No. 2 has been granted bail.

¶14

The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith the copies of material collected during investigation, including a copy of the inquest report, the post-mortem examination report, the recovery memo and the statements of the informant and his mother, which have already been annexed with the bail application. Copies of some other witnesses have also been annexed with the counter affidavit. The applicants' involvement in five cases has been shown in the counter affidavit.

¶15

The informant has also filed a counter affidavit, stating therein that the accused persons are threatening the informant and his family members so as to pressurize them to enter into a settlement and an application in this regard has been sent to the Director General of Police, however, apparently no complaint has been given to the Superintendent of Police/ Senior Superintendent of Police.

¶16

A rejoinder affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicants stating that in one of the cases, the applicant No. 1 has been granted bail and another case related to Section 135 of the Electricity Act, which has been closed.

¶17

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶18

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of

¶19

the case and keeping in view the fact that there is no eyewitness of the incident; the FIR itself states that there is an old political animosity between the parties; that although the FIR alleges that the bed on which the victim was lying was soiled with blood, apparently, recovery of blood soiled bed is not mentioned by the Investigating Officer in the charge-sheet; although seven persons are said to have assaulted the victim with sticks, the only injuries suffered by the victim is one laceration on his head and abrasion on his knee; although the Investigating Officer claims to have recovered two sticks on the pointing out of the applicants, the sticks have been recovered from an open place and there is no mention that the sticks were blood-stained; that as there is no eye-witness of the incident; that the applicants are languishing in jail since 06.04.2024 and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

¶20

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶21

Let the applicants- Shri Chandra Shukla and Narendra Kumar Shukla @ Mote be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶22

(i) the applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶23

(ii) the applicants shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicants shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶24

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶25

Order Date :- 1.4.2025 (Manoj K.)

¶26

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

Shri Chandra Shukla and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Chandra Shukla and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. 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

Master Shrihan Thru. His Mother Dr. Shilpy Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Ajeet Kumar Gupta @ Ajeet Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

C/M, U.P. Prathamik Shikshak Sangh, Lko. Thru. General Secy. Uma Shankar Singh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. and Institutional Finance and Others

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

Shikha Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohd. Faiz @ Faiz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Home Lko.