Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 150791 (ALL)

OMPRAKASH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ITS SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO.

BAIL/6429/2025 · 2025-07-11

Karunesh Singh Pawar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39601 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6429 of 2025 Applicant :- Omprakash Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Prakash Mishra,Ram Lal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.107 of 2025 under Section 109(1), 118(1), 351(3), 3(5) of BNSlcie Station Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur Kheri. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 28.03.2025 at about 10:00 p.m., while the complainant was returning home, the accused Deepak and others, on account of old enmity and with common intention and intent to kill, assaulted the complainant. A injury is alleged to have been inflicted on the forehead. After the incident, the accused persons fled the scene while hurling abuses. The complainant was initially taken to the Primary Health Center and was thereafter referred to the District Hospital, Behjam. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Two assailants have been assigned the role of causing the alleged injuries. It is submitted that the injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature, and no abnormality has been found with respect to Injury No. 1 in the medical examination. It is also submitted that the prosecution case lacks clarity regarding the identity of the assailants. The charge-sheet has been filed in the matter. The applicant is in jail since 30.03.2025. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the facts mentioned above. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. On due consideration of the facts that the injured has received one incised wound (Injury No. 1) on the forehead measuring 7 cm × 1 cm, while the rest of the injuries are mere complaints of pain; two assailants have been assigned the role of causing Injury No.1; the nature of the injury has been opined to be simple; and considering the period of incarceration of the applicant and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Om Prakash be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below 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 IPC (now Section 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 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 IPC (now Section 209 BNS). Order Date :- 11.7.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench