Allahabad High Court
Arvind Pal vs State Of U.P. on 6 August, 2025
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:132718
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26621 of 2025
Applicant :- Arvind Pal
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Anurag Dubey, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State.
3.The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.287 of 2024, under Section 302, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Mainpuri with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
4. This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first one was rejected by this Court vide order dated 13.2.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.37856 of 2024 and the following order was passed :-
"1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Atul Kumar Shahi, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Satish Trivedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Rudra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Ashutosh, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.287 of 2024, under Sections 302, 34 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Mainpuri with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Neeraj Yadav, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 11.11.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 26961 of 2024. It is further submitted that since the case of the applicant is at par to the co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.05.2024. Criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph nos.25 and 27 of the affidavit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that applicant is the main accused person as he was the wrecker- in- chief as he was the person who was driving the said Bolero vehicle and the other co-accused persons were sitting in the cabin, as such, the case of the applicant is at a different footing to the co-accused persons.
6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the case of the applicant is at a different footing to the other co-accused persons as he was driving the bolero vehicle, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.
7. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected.
8. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial."
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has raised the same arguments which he had turned at the time of first bail application, as such, it is a misuse of process of Court. Consequently, no new grounds have been presented to warrant interference with the impugned order dated 13.2.2025.
6. The instant bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected.
7.However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously as early as possible in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment.
8. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.
Order Date :- 6.8.2025
(Ravi Kant)
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
