Ravi vs State of U.P.

The present third bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 263 of 2020, under Sections - 307, 302 I.P.C., Police Station - Nayagaon, District - Etah, with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and there is no credible evidence against him. There is no independent witness of the alleged incident. Alleged recovery of pistol shown from appellant, is wholly false and the said recovered pistol was not sent to F.S.L.

¶12

It is further submitted that while rejecting second bail application of the applicant vide order dated 21.03.2025, the trial Court was directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same as early as possible preferably

¶13

BAIL No. 3847 of 2026

¶14

2

¶15

within a period of ten months but trial has not been concluded so far and as per order-sheet of the trial Court the case is still at the stage of prosecution evidence. It was submitted that case is likely to take sufficient long time, whereas applicant is in jail since 06.12.2020. Lastly, it was submitted that in case applicant is granted bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶16

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the incident of the case is quite heinous. While the informant and his family members were working at their land, applicant came there on a tractor and damaged the crop of informant. When objected, applicant has fired a bullet at son of informant resultantly he sustained fire-arm injuries and died. When the wife and daughter of informant raised alarm, they were also hit by the applicant with the tractor and they have also sustained injuries.

¶17

I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

¶18

Perusal of record shows that as per prosecution version, applicant has reached at the land of informant and fired a bullet at son of the informant, resultantly he sustained fire-arm injuries and died. When wife and daughter of informant raised alarm, they were also hit by the applicant with the tractor and they have also sustained injuries. It is correct that applicant is in jail since 06.12.2020 but it appears from the order-sheet of trial Court that for sufficient period trial was delayed at the instance of applicant and now prosecution evidence is at the final stage. The incident in question is quite heinous. Considering entire facts, no case for grant of bail is made out.

¶19

However, considering the period of custody of applicant, the trial Court is again directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same as early as

¶20

BAIL No. 3847 of 2026

¶21

3

¶22

possible preferably within a period of eight months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the party.

¶23

With aforesaid observations, the third bail application filed on behalf of applicant - Ravi , is hereby rejected .

¶24

A copy of this order be transmitted to the trial Court concerned for necessary compliance.

¶25

April 6, 2026

¶26

S Rawat

¶27

(Raj Beer Singh,J.)

¶28

Digitally signed by :- SHOBHIT RAWAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ravi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mansoor Ansari vs State of U.P.

Maulavi Hafiz Jameer vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Naresh Singh @ Naresh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rammilan vs State of U.P. and Another

Ujaifa vs State of U.P.

Shera @ Nikhil @ Nitin vs State of U.P. and 3 Others