Ravendra Alias Kaley v. State of U.P

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24874 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Ashish Kumar Dwivedi and Sri Hari Om Pandey, learned counsels for the applicant and Sri Shailesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant as well as Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record.

¶3Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 144 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 352, 351(3) & 118(2) of BNS, Police Station - Haldaur, District - Bijnor, during the pendency of trial.

¶4As per prosecution story, the applicant along with three other co-accused persons is stated to have assaulted and caused grievous injuries by sickle, lathi & danda to the uncle and father of the informant on 02.06.2025 at about 09:30 AM.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about 11 hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

¶6Learned counsel has also stated that there are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons in the FIR but subsequently in the statement of the injured persons, specific role of carrying sickle in his hand has been assigned to the applicant. It is true that injuries sustained by the injured persons are grievous in nature but the applicant himself has sustained Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Rana, Ashish Kumar Dwivedi, Hari Om Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Shailesh Kumar Srivastava Ravendra Alias Kaley .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) ten injuries on his body and they were also grievous in nature. Out of ten injuries sustained by the applicant, seven injuries are incised wounds and there is no explanation by the prosecution about the said injuries sustained by the applicant.

¶7Learned counsel has further stated that an FIR No. 194 of 2025 has been instituted on behalf of the applicant subsequently but the medical examination of the applicant has been conducted at the same C.H.C. on the date of incident i.e. on 2.6.2025 at about 02:55 PM and that too before the institution of the instant FIR which was instituted at 08:30 PM. The applicant is languishing in jail since 03.06.2025, having no criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.

¶8Per contra, learned State Law Officer and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that both the injured persons have assigned the role of assault with sharp-edged weapon i.e. sickle to the applicant, as such, he is not entitled for bail.

¶9Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence, severity of punishment, delay in lodging the FIR and also considering the fact that injuries sustained by the applicant have not been explained coupled by the fact that there being a cross-version to the instant FIR, prima facie I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10Let the applicant-Ravendra Alias Kaley, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 will not tamper with the evidence during trial.

ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶11In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶12It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant BAIL No. 24874 of 2025 shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 26, 2025 Siddhant BAIL No. 24874 of 2025 (Krishan Pahal,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad