SHIVAM DHURIYA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. HOME LKO
BAIL/572/2025 · 2025-08-18
Karunesh Singh Pawar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 118314 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 118314 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48194
Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 572 of 2025 Applicant :- Shivam Dhuriya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Shukla,Pradeep Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Kumar,Digvijay Mishra Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. 1.Heard learned counsel for the applicant, complainant's counsel, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. 2.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the role of firing has been assigned to the co-accused Mukesh Kumar Yadav and Satyam Yadav. The applicant has not been assigned any specific role. He is not named in the first information report. The name of the applicant has surfaced in the re- statement of the complainant taken after two months from the date of incident. Cause of death is cardio respiratory arrest due to ante mortem fire arm injury. The applicant has explained previous criminal history of two cases in para 15 of the bail application. Named accused persons as well as co-accused Pradeep Kumar Yadav, Pradeep Yadav alias Vikki Yadav, Aakash Singh alias Badal and Mukesh Kumar Yadav (assailant) on whom role of firing was assigned have been granted bail by coordinate Bench(s) of this Court. It is submitted that the case of the applicant is on better footing. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 15.10.2024. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or
tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 4.Learned A.G.A. and complainant's counsel opposed the prayer for bail, however, they do not dispute that it is a case of parity. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that the applicant has explained criminal history, bail orders of the co-accused, named above, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the period for which the applicant is in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.
6.Let the applicant Shivam Dhuriya, involved in Case Crime No.592 of 2024 under sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 103, 352, 3(5) B.N.S., 9/25 Arms Act, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, district Sultanpur, be released on bail 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant 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 him from disclosing such
facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) 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. (v) 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 I.P.C. (now 269 BNS) (vi) 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. (now 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A I.P.C. (now 209 BNS). 7.The application is allowed accordingly, on the ground of parity.
Order Date :- 18.8.2025 kkb/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench