SHEKH MOHAMMAD v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO AND ANOTHER
NABAIL/1424/2025 · 2025-10-07
Karunesh Singh Pawar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 197286 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 197286 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
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. - 1424 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. 126 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 352, 351(3), and 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Police Station Aaspur Devsara, District Pratapgarh.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Notices to respondent no. 2 is dispensed with in view of the proposed order.
In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 12.05.2025 at about 3:00 p.m., the complainant was going from his house to Lakhipur. When he reached near the house of Sheetla Prasad Chaurasia in village Pachauri, he saw that the accused persons were assaulting Vasant Lal and Sunny Verma. The complainant, being a villager, tried to intervene and save them. Thereupon, the accused persons started beating the complainant with sticks and sharp- edged weapons. The complainant ran towards his house to save his life, shouting for help. Hearing his cries, his son Shailesh Verma came to his rescue. The accused persons then assaulted both the complainant and his son with sticks and sharp weapons, causing serious injuries.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that due to election rivalry with the Gram Pradhan, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anamika Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shekh Mohammad .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another .....Opposite Party(s)
case. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The allegations are general in nature and no specific role has been assigned to the applicant.
It is further submitted that the applicant has not been named by the informant or by any of the four injured persons. His name has been taken only by the alleged injured Sunny Verma, who was not medically examined.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant is willing to cooperate with the investigation.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and submitted that the injured Sunny has named the present applicant, although name of the the applicant is not mentioned in the FIR. Perused the record, as well as the case diary and the statement of Sunny, which shows that he was not medically examined. It appears that he has not sustained any injury. The case of the applicant appears to be distinct from that of the other co-accused persons who have been named by the injured.
On considering the prosecution allegations, the statements of the injured, the injury report, and the distinct role of the applicant vis-à-vis the other co- accused, it cannot be said that the applicant has been falsely implicated, however, considering the fact that the alleged injured Sunny Verma was not medically examined and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant to cooperate with the investigation, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail in the present case, and the grant of bail is, however, subject to the condition that the applicant shall fully cooperate with the investigation in accordance with the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020) 5 SCC 1.
In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid FIR/Case Crime number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned with the following conditions:-
NABAIL No. 1424 of 2025 2
The applicant shall report to the investigating officer within twenty days from today. He shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.
The application is allowed. October 7, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S NABAIL No. 1424 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench