Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 199703 (ALL)

MOHIT KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. U.P. LKO.

BAIL/8282/2025 · 2025-12-11

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. - 8282 of 2025 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. 166 of 2025, under sections 103(1), 109(1), 3(5), 238 BNS, P.S. Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that in terms of FIR it was alleged that husband of informant used to work as a labour and subsequently his mobile was coming switched off and an information was received that her husband was killed by some persons in which one person named Rakesh was also injured. No one was named in the FIR. Cause of death as per post mortem report is punctured wound on the left eye and the other person died on account of wounds on left eye, left ear, left left side of face, elbow joints, left thigh and right thigh. Subsequently the applicant was linked with the offence in question as the applicant sits near the place of incident. The statement of one of the witness is on record wherein it was stated that as many as four persons were seen taking the injured persons towards funeral pyres. Based upon the said statement alone the applicant was linked with the offence in question. The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the deceased had come with an intent of theft and were attacked by the residents which resulted in his death and the applicant was implicated solely because he was living in a thatched house at the place of incident. No recovery has Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raj Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mohit Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) been effect from the applicant in the presence of independent witness. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application. 5. Considering the nature of evidence linking the applicant to be prima facie weak and there are no eye witness to the incident, however, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the applicant who is in jail since 21.4.2025 and has no criminal history is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed. 6. Let the applicant Mohit Kumar 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 11, 2025 J. K. Dinkar BAIL No. 8282 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- JESHU KUMAR DINKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench