Chhotey Alias Badshah vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:47221

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8293 of 2025

Applicant :- Chhotey Alias Badshah Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Kamlesh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Pradeep Kumar, learned AGA for the Staterespondent.

¶7

The instant second application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.122 of 2020, under Sections 452, 302 I.P.C., Police Station Auraiya, District Auraiya, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application has been dismissed by Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh, J. vide order dated 04.03.2021 but as His Lordship has been transferred, therefore the instant second bail application is listed today before this Bench as this Bench is dealing with such matters.

¶9

He further submits that he is pressing the instant second bail application on the ground that alongwith applicant, his wife was also made accused and as per the dying declaration of the deceased, she ablazed her and applicant caught hold her but after rejection of the first bail application of the applicant, his wife i.e. co-accused Kusma has been released on bail by Co-ordinate Bench

¶10

of this Court vide order dated 24.01.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.53762 of 2023.

¶11

He further submits that considering the dying declaration of the deceased, case of applicant is on better footing than co-accused Kusma.

¶12

He further submits that applicant is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 17.10.2021 i.e. for last almost three and half years.

¶13

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and there is also dying declaration of the deceased but could not dispute the fact that from the dying declaration, it reflects that main allegation of ablazing the deceased was against wife of the applicant i.e. co-accused Kusma and she has been released on bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court after rejection of the first bail application of the applicant.

¶14

He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 17.10.2021 i.e. for last almost three and half years.

¶15

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶16

However, this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application has been dismissed by Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh, J. vide order dated 04.03.2021 but as His Lordship has been transferred, therefore the instant second bail application is listed today before this Bench as this Bench is dealing with such matters.

¶17

Further, record also suggests that after rejection of the first bail application of the applicant, co-accused Kusma, the wife of the applicant, has been released on bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and after considering the dying declaration of the deceased, which has been annexed alongwith the instant bail application, it reflects, co-accused was the person, who ablazed the deceased. However, as per the deceased at the time of incident, applicant caught hold her, therefore, considering the dying declaration of the deceased, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that case of applicant is on better footing than co-accused Kusma, cannot be ruled out.

¶18

Further, applicant is having no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 17.10.2021 i.e. for last almost three and half years.

¶19

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶20

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶21

Let the applicant- Chhotey Alias Badshah 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 the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶22

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶23

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the

¶24

case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶25

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶26

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶27

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶28

Order Date :- 3.4.2025 Zafar

¶29

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chhotey Alias Badshah v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhotey Alias Badshah v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mahesh Prasad Rajak vs State of U.P.

Sarwan Vishwakarma vs State of U.P.

Rajindar vs State of U.P.

Bhagat Singh vs State of U.P.

Balvinder Alias Mataru vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Kumar Jain vs State of U.P.