Allowed

Dhoop Narayan @ Dhrup Narayan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Allahabad HC3 Jul 2025BAIL/9785/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Sections 304, 323, 324, 325, 504 and 506 IPC arising from Case Crime No. 0002 of 2024. The fact witnesses PW-1 to PW-3 had turned hostile and did not support the prosecution version against the applicant, who had no prior criminal history. Bail allowed with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in like amount, with conditions regarding trial attendance and conduct.

Dhoop Narayan @ Dhrup Narayan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37595

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9785 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Dhoop Narayan @ Dhrup Narayan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Diwakar Pratap Pandey,Ashish Kharwar

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶7

1. Heard Sri Amit Kumar Sonkar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anant Pratap Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶8

2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Dhoop Narayan @ Dhrup Narayan) is languishing in jail since 04.01.2024 in Case Crime No.0002 of 2024, under Sections 304, 323, 324, 325, 504 & 506 I.P.C., Police StationJahangirganj, District-Ambedkar Nagar.

¶9

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

¶10

4. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court towards the supplementary affidavit filed on 09.05.2025 by the applicant enclosing therewith the true/ photocopy of the statement/ examination of PW-1, PW-2 & PW-3, who are the relevant/fact witnesses. Those relevant/ fact witnesses have been turned hostile. PW-1 is a Panchnama/ eye witness, PW-2 is the informant and PW-3 is a Panchnama witness/ eye witness. Those statements have been shown to the Court (Annexure No.SA-1).

¶11

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has therefore submitted that since the relevant/ fact witnesses have been turned hostile and have not supported the prosecution version, rather, have stated that the prosecution story is false and misconceived so far as the role of the present applicant is concerned. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present applicant may be enlarged on bail. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. He has undertaken on

¶12

behalf of the present applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court, and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings properly.

¶13

Learned Additional Government Advocate has however opposed the prayer for bail of the present applicant by submitting that since the role of the present applicant was found in the commission of crime, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail, but the aforesaid fact has not been disputed by the learned Additional Government Advocate as the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the applicant is supported by the statements enclosed with the supplementary affidavit.

¶14

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that the relevant/ fact witnesses, who are PW-1, PW-2 & PW-3, have been turned hostile; the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever and the undertaking that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate in the trial proceeding properly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶15

8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶16

9. Let the applicant (Dhoop Narayan @ Dhrup Narayan) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:-

¶17

(i) 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. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶18

(ii) The applicant 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 IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023.

¶19

(iii) 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./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such

¶20

proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023.

¶21

(iv) 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./351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

¶22

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶23

Order Date :- 3.7.2025 Suresh/

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dhoop Narayan @ Dhrup Narayan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhoop Narayan @ Dhrup Narayan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ramdev Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Azad Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Shri Prakash and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Medical Health/Family Welfare, U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Ankit Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Birendra Kumar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Medical Health/Family Welfare Lko. and 5 Others