Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 188451 (ALL)

KALKATAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO

/12702/2024 · 2025-12-09

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. - 12702 of 2024 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and Sri Tribhuvan Narai Singh, learned Counsel for the complainant and perused the record. 2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.395 of 2024, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Mohammadi, District Lakhimpur Kheri. 3. In terms of the FIR, allegations were levelled that the son of the informant was sleeping outside his home on 03.06.2024. Subsequently, an information was received that he was found dead. An apprehension was expressed that the applicant had throttled him to death. It was also stated that the informant had enmity with the applicant. 4. In the light of the aforesaid, the counsel for the applicant states that there are no eyewitness to the incident. The applicant is linked with the offence in question based upon the confessional statement and the statement of the two witnesses, who had supported the allegation against the applicant on the basis of last seen theory. The cause of death as per the postmortem report is due to antemortem strangulation. Five contusion injuries were also observed in the postmortem report. It is also argued that three of the facts witnesses have been recorded during trial, who have not stated against the applicant. 5. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raghavendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Tribhuvan Narai Singh Kalkatar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko .....Opposite Party(s) 6. Considering the nature of the evidence against the applicant to be prima faice weak and the fact that three facts witnesses have been examined coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 06.06.2024 and the criminal history has been duly explained, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let the applicant Kalkatar be released on bail in the abovesaid first information report number on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the 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. 8. The statement of the three facts witnesses have been handed over across the bar, which are taken on record. 9. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial. December 9, 2025 akverma BAIL No. 12702 of 2024 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench