Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 173255 (ALL)

UDAIRAJ HARIJAN @ UDAI v. STATE OF U.P THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. HOME LKO.

/7553/2024 · 2025-12-02

Pankaj Bhatia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7553 of 2024 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record. 2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.142 of 2023, under sections 302, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Jethwara, District Pratapgarh. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that in terms of FIR it was alleged that certain finance was being settled by brother of the informant. When the brother of the informant met with applicant a dispute ensued in between them because of which the applicant allegedly attacked brother of informant with an iron rod which resulted in substantial injuries and subsequent death. In the light of the said allegations learned counsel for the applicant draws my attention to statement of eye witness wherein it was stated that the brother of the informant had come to the applicant for demanding money which was payable to them and in the altercation that have ensued the applicant allegedly attacked him with lathi on head which resulted in substantial injuries. Cause of death as per post mortem report are two lacerated wounds on the frontal region and on the eye region. Applicant states that it was a case of dispute arising out of petty issue with regard to payment of certain money. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application. 5. Considering the submissions made at the bar, FIR and statement of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashok Kumar Srivastava, Avinash Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Udairaj Harijan @ Udai .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) witness it was case of dispute arising out of petty issue and provocation which resulted in alleged offence and prima facie mens rea to cause the offience is apparently missing, however, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the applicant who is in jail since 22.7.2023 and has one criminal history of minor offence is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed. 6. Let the applicant Udairaj Harijn @ Udal be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions: (a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings; (b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and (c) 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. December 2, 2025 J. K. Dinkar BAIL No. 7553 of 2024 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- JESHU KUMAR DINKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench