Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11174 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11918 of 2024 Applicant :- Kaushal Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Home Civil Sectt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Nagendra Singh,Kuldeep Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Nagendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anant Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 1.9.2024 in Case Crime No. 0299 of 2024 u/s 302, 201, 120B IPC, P.S. Mohanlalganj, District Lucknow. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed rejoinder affidavit, same is taken on record. 4. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the sole allegation has been levelled against one Kaushal Kumar s/o Sohanlal and the present applicant is Kaushal s/o Kailash. He has been implicated on account of mistaken identity. Learned counsel has stated that the main accused Kaushal s/o Sohanlal is in jail. He has further submitted that the statement of the witnesses has been recorded wherein the fact emerged that the present applicant who is son of Kailash has not committed any offence rather the main accused is Kaushal s/o Sohanlal has committed the offence.The other co-accused persons Jeetu and Jitendra Kumar has been granted bail by the court-below which have been enclosed as Annexure no. 8 to the bail application and Annexure no. R.A.-1 to the rejoinder affidavit being Bail Application No. 5290 of 2024 and Bail Application No. 8056 of 2024 respectively. The case of the applicant is on better footing as both the co- accused persons Jeetu and Jitendra Verma were present on the spot at the time of incident. The applicant has no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. The charge- sheet has been filed in this case. 5. The learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted. 6. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. 7. Without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that in the F.I.R. the sole allegation has been levelled against one Kaushal Kumar s/o Sohanlal and the present applicant is Kaushal s/o Kailash, applicant has been implicated on account of mistaken identity, the main accused Kaushal s/o Sohanlal is in jail, the statement of the witnesses has been recorded wherein the fact emerged that the present applicant is son of Kailash and has not committed any offence rather the main accused is Kaushal s/o Sohanlal who has committed the offence, co- accused persons Jeetu and Jitendra Kumar have been granted bail by the court-below, case of the applicant is on better footing as both the co-accused persons Jeetu and Jitendra Verma were present on the spot at the time of incident, applicant has no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever, charge-sheet has been filed in this case and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant Kaushal Kumar, involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) 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. (ii) 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 Penal Code. (iii) 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.may be issued and if 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 Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned. . (Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 20.2.2025/Om Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench