ADARSH KUMAR SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO
NABAIL/322/2025 · 2025-04-18
Manish Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 134036 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 134036 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:21890 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 322 of 2025 Applicant :- Adarsh Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Ayodhya Prasad Mishra A.P. Mishra,Rituraj Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party no.1. 2. First Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with regard to Case Crime no.39 of 2025, under Sections 3(5), 109, 191(2) and 309(6) of B.N.S. 2023, P.S. Vibhuti Khand, District Lucknow. 3. As per contents of first information report, the incident is said to have taken on 29.01.2025 between 9.00 P.M. and 9.30 P.M. when applicant along with co-accused is said to have attacked the informant and inflicted serious injuries upon him. 4. It has been submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in charges levelled against him which would be evident from fact that applicant has also suffered serious injuries with injury report being brought on record. It is thus submitted that injuries have been suffered by both sides and at this stage, the instigator of altercation cannot be determined. It is also submitted that investigation is ongoing with applicant co-operating with the same. It is submitted that previous criminal history of applicant of one case has been explained in paragraph-6 of affidavit filed in support of bail application. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed anticipatory bail with submission that injury report of informant clearly corroborates the allegations levelled against applicant. There is nothing adverse that applicant is not cooperating in the investigation. 6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, subject to further evidence being collected during investigation, it appears that cross-F.I.R.(s) have been filed by both the sides with injuries also being suffered on both sides. At this stage, it would be difficult to determine the instigator of altercation which has taken place. Thus, in view of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, it would be appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C./482 BNNS. 7.
In view of the above, it is provided that till filing of police report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C. in the event of arrest, the applicant Adarsh
Kumar Singh shall be released on anticipatory bail in aforesaid Case Crime number on his/her furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned with the following conditions:- (i) That the accused-applicant shall make himself/herself available for interrogation by police authorities as and when required and will cooperate with the investigation; (ii) That the accused-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; and (iii) That the accused-applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. (iv) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this order. 8. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 18.4.2025 kvg/- Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench