Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 130342 (ALL)

BABBU v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME U.P. LKO.

BAIL/2566/2025 · 2025-04-01

Manish Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:18115 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2566 of 2025 Applicant :- Babbu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record. 2. First bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.342 of 2024 under Sections 115(2), 351(3), 352, 110 of BNS, Police Station, Hujoorpur, District Bahraich. 3. As per contents of first information report, the incident is said to have taken place on 22.8.2024 when the applicant along with co-accused is said to have entered into an altercation with a ten year old Nisar Ahmad and inflicted injuries upon him. 4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that he has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him. He further submits that the injuries sustained by the victim are simple in nature, as evident from the injury report, which notes two simple injuries and one traumatic swelling on the victim's head. He has also adverted to statement of the injured to submit that it was a simple case of disagreement which has been blown out of proportion. He further submits that the punishment under the said sections is only upto seven years. He also submits that the applicant is in jail since 7.3.2025 without any previous criminal history, therefore, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 5. Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State have opposed the prayer of bail with the submission that the injury report as well as statement of injured clearly corroborate the charges levelled against applicant. Learned AGA further states that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, and subject to further evidence being led in trial, maximum punishment under the aforesaid sections is under seven years, nature of injuries and altercation itself appears to have taken place on spur of moment, therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly bail application is allowed. 8. Let applicant Babbu, involved in aforesaid case crime 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 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. (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 269 of BNS. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 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 209 of BNS. (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 351 BNSS. 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. Order Date :- 1.4.2025 AKK Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench