Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 181676 (ALL)

UMESH GIRI AND 5 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER

A482/9236/2025 · 2025-12-05

Rajeev Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9236 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present application is filed with the prayer to quash the proceedings of the charge sheet No.05, dated 01.03.2025, arising out of Case Crime No.925 of 2023 under Section 302 I.P.C. and Charge Sheet No.04 dated 23.9.2024 filed by the police under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 324, 307 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was falsely implicated in the present case, thereafter, charge sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 324, 307 I.P.C. He further submits that injured died after 13 months of the incident, then supplementary charge sheet was filed under Section 302 I.P.C. He also submits that earlier applicants were enlarged on bail by the learned court below (bail orders are annexed as Annexure No.21 to 27 to this application). Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as applicants were already enlarged on bail in crime in question, therefore, only by adding Section 302 I.P.C. fresh sureties as well as bond is not needed. He lastly relies on the decision of this Court in the case of Smt. Bachchi Devi Vs. State of U.P. & Anr. passed in Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 6400 of 2025 and requested Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Siddhartha Sinha, Arun Sinha Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vijay Nath Pandey Umesh Giri And 5 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) that direction may be issued to the authorities to consider the bail bond furnished earlier for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. too. 4. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposes the prayer of the applicant but they do not dispute that there is no evidence that applicant misused the liberty of bail granted in the crime in question for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 324, 307 I.P.C., thereafter, after 13 months by way of supplementary charge sheet Section 302 I.P.C. is added. 5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, going through the contents of the application as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that applicants were enlarged on bail by this Court as well as court below by way of order annexed with the application as Annexure No.21 to 27 for the offence under Section 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 324, 307 I.P.C. and after 13 months from the date of incident, injured died, thereafter, supplementary charge sheet was filed by adding Section 302 I.P.C., therefore, personal bond as well as sureties furnished by the applicant in terms of earlier bail order be also treated for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. 6. In view of the above, the present application is disposed of. 7. The applicants are directed to cooperate in the trial of the case in question. December 5, 2025 GauraV/- A482 No. 9236 of 2025 2 (Rajeev Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench