Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 153675 (ALL)

RAM AUTAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND ANOTHER

NABAIL/926/2025 · 2025-07-30

Karunesh Singh Pawar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:43993 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 926 of 2025 Applicant :- Ram Autar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. The present bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.288/2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 333, 109 BNS, P.S. Gangaghat, District Unnao. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. It is alleged in the prosecution case that the accused along with the co-accused persons break into the house of the complainant with illegal weapon and have fired at injured Sumit thus, have caused grievous injury and gave threat of live to entire family and have further made several rounds of firing in the air. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that injured Sumit has sustained two firearm injuries. The eye-witnesses have alleged the role of firing on the Sumit injured to co-accused Abhishek and not on the present applicant. The firearm injury has been sustained on non-vital part. Applicant has no previous criminal history. No recovery has been made from the applicant. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant submitting that the investigation is going on. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that he will cooperate in the investigation. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and having no criminal antecedents, coupled with the undertaking given by the applicant that he will cooperate in the investigation as also the fact that nothing has been recovered from the applicant, role of firing is on co-accused Sumit and not the present applicant, it would be expedient in the interest of justice that the liberty of the applicant may be protected in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. In view of the above, it is provided that, the applicant-Ram Autar shall report to the Investigating Officer within ten days from today who shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid Case Crime number on his 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:- (1) The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witnesses. (2) The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/1.O./S.H.O. concerned call (s) for investigation/interrogation. (3) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. (4) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. The application stands allowed. Order Date :- 30.7.2025 Saurabh Yadav/- Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench