Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 158358 (ALL)

ASHOK KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. DEPTT. HOME LKO.

BAIL/7693/2025 · 2025-08-19

Karunesh Singh Pawar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48388 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7693 of 2025 Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Shyamji Dixit,Pramendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.262 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109, 118(1), 324(4), 351(2), 103(1) BNS, P.S. Mishrik, District Sitapur. In the prosecution case it is alleged that 14 named and 8-10 unnamed persons have beaten the sons of complainant due to which Anoop has suffered injuries; Kuldeep was also beaten with an intent to kill and due to serious injuries Kuldeep was taken to District Hospital, Sitapur from there he was referred to the Trauma Centre Medical College, Lucknow and his position is serious. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the co-accused Rohit Kumar who was assigned the similar role has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 05.08.2025 passed in criminal misc. bail application No. 13008 of 2024. Learned counsel for the applicant seeks parity with the order of the co-accused. It is further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 28.08.2024 without having any criminal antecedent. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application, however, could not dispute the fact that it is a case of parity. On due consideration to the fact that co-accused Rohit Kumar who was assigned the similar role has been enlarged on bail, coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 28.08.2024, without having any criminal antecedent, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail on the ground of parity. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. Let the applicant Ashok Kumar 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). It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present anticipatory bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. Order Date :- 19.8.2025 R.C. Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench