Jogendra Alias Jugendra Vs State of U.P.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46547 of 2024

¶2

Jogendra Alias Jugendra

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

			....	.Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Amresh Dwivedi, Dwivedi,	Singh, Piyush Sunil Singh	Kamlesh Dubey,	Kumar Saurabh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A., Ku	ldeep Singh	Chahar
Court No.- 70

¶7

HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.

¶8

Supplementary affidavit dated 10.3.2026 filed on behalf of applicant is taken on record.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant, learned counsel for the complainant/ informant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶10

This bail application has been moved on behalf of the accused-applicant/ Jogendra @ Jugendra for grant of bail, in Case Crime No.106 of 2024, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 325, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Fatehpur Sikri, District Agra, during pendency of trial.

¶11

Learned counsel for accused-applicant, while pressing the bail application, submits that, the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case and has not committed any offence, as alleged by the prosecution. Allegations of causing firearm injury to the injured persons have been levelled against the applicant. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that, entire prosecution story is false, baseless and concocted. As per medical report of injured Vishvendra Singh, prepare at Saket Hospital, Agra, dated 8.6.2025, injury caused to him was simple in nature. The injuries caused to the injured persons are not of such nature, which would have caused the death of the injured persons. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that, till date only two witnesses have been examined and statement of injured Ram Avtar has not been recorded yet. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that, the injured Ram

¶12

BAIL No. 46547 of 2024

¶13

2

¶14

Avtar has been discharged from the hospital on 16.6.2024 with satisfactory condition and the accused-applicant is languishing in jail in this matter, since 9.6.2024 i.e. for about 2 years, criminal history of one case has been explained in para 21 of the instant bail application and there is no likelihood that the accused-applicant, after release on bail, may flee from the process of law or will misuse the liberty of bail, therefore, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶15

Per contra, learned counsel for the informant/ complainant opposes the prayer for bail of the applicant on the ground that, specific role of firing has been levelled against the applicant in the first information report of this case and as per medical report of injured Ram Avtar, prepared at Saket Hospital, Agra, dated 8.6.2024, the injury caused to him is due to fire arm and is life danger . X-ray report of the said injured dated 6.6.2024 reveals bullet shaped, sakpag object in abdomen. It is further submitted that, CECT (abdomen) report dated 7.6.2024 shows:- Moderate hemothorax # L1, L2, L3 vertebra (spinous process); Posterior end of 11^th and 12^th ribs spleen injury; Metallic density object in para-spinal muscles at L2 level (2 bullets) . He further submits that, the injured Ram Avtar remained admitted for about 10 days and was discharged on 16.6.2024 and treatment of the injured is still going on at some private hospital, till date . Total four persons have got injured in the said incident, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶16

Learned A.G.A. for the State supports the submissions raised by learned counsel for the informant/ complainant and opposes the prayer for bail of the applicant on the ground that, the injuries caused by the applicant are grievous in nature, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶17

Having considered the rival contentions of the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that the injured- Ram Avtar was admitted to Saket Hospital, Agra on 6.6.2016 and was discharged on 16.6.2024 and remained admitted for about ten days. As per medical report of the injured Ram Avtar, the injury caused to him is due to fire arm and is life danger ous. X-ray report of the said injured dated 6.6.2024 reveals bullet shaped, sakpag object in abdomen and CECT (abdomen) report of the injured dated 7.6.2024 shows:- Moderate hemothorax # L1, L2, L3 vertebra (spinous process); Posterior end of 11^th and 12^th ribs spleen injury; Metallic density object in para-spinal muscles at L2 level (2 bullets) . As per

¶18

BAIL No. 46547 of 2024

¶19

3

¶20

reports shown by learned counsel for the informant/ complainant, it is evident that, treatment of the injured is still going on at some private hospital, till date. Total four persons have got injured in the said incident. Thus, having regard to the evidence available on record against the applicant and his complicity in the crime, I do not find any good ground to release the applicant on bail. Hence, the bail application moved on behalf of applicant - Jogendra @ Jugendra is hereby rejected.

¶21

Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the case.

¶22

March 28, 2026 Gurpreet Singh

¶23

(Harvir Singh,J.)

¶24

Digitally signed by :- GURPREET SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jogendra Alias Jugendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jogendra Alias Jugendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Jayanti and 3 Others vs State of Up and Another

Tejinder Alias Vikki vs State of U.P.

Mithun Kumar @ Sujeet Kumar vs State of U.P.

Parkar @ Prakar Gupta @ Om Prakash Gupta vs State of U.P.

Mukul vs State of U.P. and Another

Nishant vs State of U.P.