Pradeep and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:140249

Court No. - 69

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 4924 of 2025

Applicant :- Pradeep And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicants is taken on record.

¶7

2 Heard learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Nagendra Kumar Mishra, learned Brief Holder for the State- opposite party, and perused the material available on record.

¶8

This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 243 of 2024, under Sections 147, 148, 452, 307, 325 I.P.C., Police Station Baghpat, District Baghpat.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the first information report, the applicants along with two named accused and an unknown person are alleged to have assaulted nine persons namely informant- Rajendra, Rajveer, Km. Vanshika, Kartik, Natthu, Smt. Balesh, Smt. Babita, Parita and Roshan. Specific allegation of running the tractor over the family members of the informant has been assigned to co-accused Monu. In the alleged incident Babita received grievous injuries on non-vital part of the body. Vanshika received two injuries, the injury no. 1 was simple in nature and the injury no. 2 on the forehead was grievous in nature. Rest of the injured received injuries which were simple in nature. The case of the applicants is clearly distinguishable from that of coaccused Monu. Vague and general role of assault has been assigned to the applicant. During the course of investigation the applicants were granted protection till the cognizance is taken on the police report by this Court vide order dated 13.05.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 7176 of 2024, Pramod and others v. State of U.P. and others. The investigation has been completed. Charge-sheet has been submitted. The applicants have cooperated in the investigation. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicants have been summoned by the court concerned. The criminal history of the applicants has been explained in Paragraph- 2 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶10

Learned Brief Holder for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶11

Having regard to the submissions made, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants and, in particular, the fact that specific allegation of running the tractor over the family members of the informant has been assigned to co-accused Monu; in the alleged incident Babita received grievous injuries on non-vital part of the body; Vanshika received two injuries, the injury no. 1 was simple in nature and the injury no. 2 on the forehead was grievous in nature; rest of the injured received injuries which were simple in nature; vague and general role of assault has been assigned to the applicants; during the course of investigation the applicants were granted protection till the cognizance is taken on the police report; investigation has been completed; the applicants have cooperated in the investigation, and no custodial interrogation is required, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶12

In the event of arrest, the applicants- Pradeep, Pramod and Goldi @ Ankit, involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicants shall make themselves available on each and every date fixed in the matter by the court concerned;

¶14

(ii) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade from disclosing such facts to the Court;

¶15

(iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the concerned court.

¶16

Further, in default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

¶17

The application stands disposed of.

¶18

Order Date :- 14.8.2025 SKT/-

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pradeep and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

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