MAN BHARAN v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO.
BAIL/3295/2025 · 2025-08-12
Karunesh Singh Pawar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 135168 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 135168 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47154 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3295 of 2025 Applicant :- Man Bharan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Verma,Akhilendra Pratap Singh,Himanshu Tiwari,Mohd Agha Haider Rizvi,Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shailendra Singh Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed by accused- applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.484 of 2024, under Sections 352, 191(2), 191(3), 103(1) of BNS, P.S. Sushant Golf City, District Lucknow. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that all the three independent witnesses have assigned general role of assault to five accused persons including the present applicant. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. He submits that co-accused Neetu who was assigned the general role has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 29.05.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4801 of 2025 to which applicant seeks parity. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 15.09.2024. Applicant has no criminal history. 4. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail prayer. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that applicant has been assigned the
role of having axe in his hand and thus, his case is different from the co-accused Neetu. 5. Perused the record. 6. A perusal of the post mortem report shows that following ante mortem injuries has been suffered by the deceased:-
"1. LACERATED WOUND 02 CM X 02 CM X MUSCLE DEEP PRESENT ON LEFT EAR. 2. LACERATED WOUND 03 CM X 01 CM X BONE DEEP PRESENT ON LEFT SIDE BACK OF HEAD, 03 CM POSTERIOR TO LEFT EAR. 3. CONTUSION 08 CM X 06 CM PRESENT ON LEFT SIDE OF HEAD, JUST ABOVE THE LEFT EAR
4. ABRADED CONTUSION 02 CM X 02 CM PRESENT ON LEFT SIDE OF FACE, 03 CM BELOW LEFT EYE. 5. ABRADED CONTUSION 03 CM X 02 CM PRESENT ON LEFT SIDE OF NECK, 04 CM BELOW LEFT EAR LOBULE."
7. In the opinion cause of death is Coma due to ante mortem head injury.
In the post mortem report, out of five ante mortem injuries, two are lacerated wounds rest are contusion and abraded contusion. All these injuries can be caused by both weapon i.e. danda and axe. 8. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.09.2024 having no criminal history, bail order of co- accused Neetu Singh (supra), from the prosecution case prima facie it is not clear as to who has caused the fatal blow, no specific allegation against the applicant, it is not disputed between the parties that examination of P.W.1 is going on, till date even examination of one prosecution witness is not complete so also the judgment passed in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra and another : Criminal Appeal No.2787 of 2024 and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant Man Bharan be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions: (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 of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 269 of 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 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 174-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 209 BNS).
Order Date :- 12.8.2025 Saurabh Yadav/- Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench