Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86935 Court No. - 47 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12383 of 2025 Applicant :- Anjani Shukla Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Deenanath Mishra,Dharmendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Chandra Narayan Mishra,G.A.,Sandeep Kumar Agrahari Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. Heard Sri Deenanath Mishra and Sri D. P. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Chandra Narayan Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State. There are allegations against nine named and two unnamed accused of committing offence of rioting, criminal intimidation, etc. in the first information report. Subsequently two persons died on account of injury sustained in the alleged incident. The informant was also injured. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to statement of co-accused, Prem Kumar Shukla, the deceased and the informant were making construction on the plot of co-accused, Mohan Shukla, who called the police. The police came and stopped the constructions. Just after the police left, the informant side again starting the construction over the plot of co-accused, Mohan Shukla. Thereafter both the parties entered into fight. Co- accused, Mohan Shukla and the applicant, Anjani Shukla, also suffered injury in the incident but they could not lodge the first information report since they were arrested by the police. The applicant along with ladies of family and a minor were falsely implicated in this case by the informant. They have already been granted bail. The applicant has been implicated in this case on the basis of general allegations. Recovery of two blood stained axe is alleged to have been made on the pointing out of the applicant and the co-accused but in the post mortem report of the deceased no injury of axe was found. He has submitted that on the basis of planted recovery of two axe he has been falsely implicated along with accused. Applicant is in jail since 07.10.2023. Before the trial court only three prosecution witnesses have been examined. Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application and has submitted that the role of causing injury by axe has been assigned to the applicant and co-accused, Sonu, human blood was found thereon. However, he is unable to explain the relevance to recover of axe on the pointing out of the applicant and co-accused, Sonu, when there was no injury founds to have been caused by axe on the person of two deceased Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. Let the applicant, Anjani Shukla, involved in Session Case No.54 of 2024, Case Crime NO. 192 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 323, 325, 427, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C, Police Station Gajner, District- Kanpur Dehat be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 22.5.2025 SS Digitally signed by :- SURENDER SINGH NARANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad