Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:24719 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 359 of 2025 Applicant :- Upendra Narayan Shukla @ Chote Shukla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Sampurna Nand Shukla,Pankaj Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jay Prakash Singh Vats Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Shri Pankaj Shukla, the learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Rajeev Kumar Verma, the learned AGA-I for the State, Shri Jay Prakash Singh Vats, the learned counsel for the informant and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.42 of 2025 under Sections 105, 238 B.N.S. registered at Police Station- Kotwali Dehat, District- Pratapgarh. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 03.03.2025 stating that the informant's son aged 12 years had gone out of his home at about 01:00 PM on 21.02.2025 but he did not come back. The applicant asked them at about 09:30 PM that they should look for the informant's son in the mustard field of Jagbali Dubey also to ascertain as to whether any animal has not taken him away. Upon this, the informant went to the mustard field and found the dead body of his son. The applicant also reached there and said that some wild hog would have killed the boy. There were several burn injuries and cut wounds on the dead body. About 20-25 metres away from the spot where the dead body was found, the applicant has put live electricity wires around the field. The informant expressed apprehension that his son died due to electrocution from the live wires put by the applicant around his potato field and thereafter, the applicant shifted the dead body from his potato field to the mustard field of Jagbali Dubey. 4. Prior to lodging of the F.I.R., the informant had informed the police on 22.02.2025 at about 10:48 that his son had died accidentally due to electrocution on 21.02.2025. 5. The inquest report contains opinion of the witnesses that the victim died due to electrocution. 6. The postmortem report mentions burn injuries over all fingers of left hand and it is written in the report that it might be the entry point of electrocution, burn injury over right knee joint which might be the exit point of electrocution and burn injury present above left knee joint. The cause of death has been opined to be shock due to electrocution. 7. In the affidavit filed in support of the application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he is falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. 8. A supplementary affidavit has been filed by the applicant stating that no wire fencing, any electric fencing or Jhatka Machine or open electricity wires is installed in the field and some photographs have been annexed with the supplementary affidavit in support of this contention. However, the supplementary affidavit merely makes a statement about the present situation and there is no averment that on the date of incident, no such thing existed on the place of the incident. 9. It has further been stated that there is an undue delay in filing of the F.I.R. 10. Learned counsel for the informant has filed an application for dismissal of the bail application and in the affidavit filed in support of this application, he has submitted that the informant had went into shock after the incident and thereafter, he went to the police station several times but his F.I.R. was not lodge promptly. After the matter was reported in print media/social media, the police registered his F.I.R. Thus, the delay in lodging of the F.I.R. has been sufficiently explained. 11. Some photographs showing the injuries suffered by the deceased boy and electricity wires running through the fence installed around a field has been annexed with the supplementary counter affidavit. 12. The learned A.G.A.-I has opposed the anticipatory bail application and he has produced the relevant extract of the case diary for perusal of the Court wherein the Investigating Officer has recorded after inspection of the spot that electricity wires is installed around the boundary of the applicant's field. He has further submitted that the investigation of the present case is still going on. 13. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the Investigating Officer has found electricity wires installed around the fence of the applicant's field; a young boy aged 12 years has lost his life due to electrocution by the electricity wire installed around the applicant's field; the delay in lodging the FIR has been sufficiently explained by the informant by his affidavit, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts do not warrant exercise of discretion of this Court by granting pre-arrest bail to the applicant. 12. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. . [Subhash Vidyarthi, J.] Order Date :- 30.4.2025/-Amit K- Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench