SHYAM BABU v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO.
BAIL/9516/2025 · 2025-10-07
Pankaj Bhatia
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 199755 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 199755 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9516 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.94 of 2025, under Section 103(1), 61(2)(Ka), 109(1), 3(5) of BNS, P.S. Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur Kheri. 3. The FIR in question alleged that on 11.03.2025 husband of the informant had gone to Lakhimpur Kheri and while coming back, a truck bearing No.UP 27 BT 3537 ran over the husband which resulted in his death. It was also stated that from call recording of the phone of the husband, it was revealed that one Santosh was asking about the location of the husband. Allegations were levelled against Santosh that he did not even attend the funeral. Allegations were also levelled that offence was committed on account of election dispute. 4. In the light of the said, submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the postmortem report clearly indicates injuries which are abraded contusions on the face, front of the chest, abdomen, and the bones were fractured which clearly indicate that the death was on account of accident. With regard to the applicant, it was stated that the only allegation against the applicant is that he was sitting in the truck which had caused the offence. It is further argued that the owner of the truck has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 19.06.2025. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arun Sinha, Siddhartha Sinha Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shyam Babu .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s)
5. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application. 6. Considering the fact that there are no allegations against the applicant and there is no material to corroborate the implication of the applicant with the offence in question coupled with the fact that the applicant is in custody since 25.03.2025 and has no criminal antecedent, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed. 7.
Let the applicant Shyam Babu be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of the like amount 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. October 7, 2025 nishant BAIL No. 9516 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench