Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 185620 (ALL)

DINESH KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME U.P. LKO. AND ANOTHER

/2012/2025 · 2025-12-15

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2012 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.566 of 2024 under Section 3(5), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 110 BNS, Police Station Mohammadpur Khala, District Barabanki. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. Notices to respondent no.2 are dispensed with in view of the proposed order. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that five persons have been accused of causing injuries to five injured persons. It is further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated due to previous enmity. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has cooperated with the investigation and has no criminal antecedents. The charge-sheet has already been filed, and the alleged offence is punishable with imprisonment up to seven years. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jay Kumar Soni, Madhavesh Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A. Dinesh Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) shall cooperate in the trial. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant; however, he does not dispute that out of the five injured persons, all have sustained simple injuries, except the injury sustained by Guddu. Upon due consideration of the facts that there are general allegations in the prosecution case regarding causing injuries to the five injured persons; except one injury sustained by Guddu, all other injuries are prima facie simple in nature; the applicant was not arrested during the course of investigation; and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial, and in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Musheer Alam v. State of U.P. and another, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 116, and without entering into the merits of the case, this Court finds it appropriate to grant protection to the applicant. In view of the above, it is provided that the applicant shall surrender before the concerned court within 20 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. On such surrender, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial and he will not influence the witnesses.The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. Any other condition which the trial court may deem fit and proper may also be imposed. In case of default, it would be open for the trial court to proceed in accordance with law. The application is allowed accordingly. December 15, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S NABAIL No. 2012 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench