Allahabad High Court
ANUJ YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- HARVIR SINGH
Holding
The court held that the grievous nature of the offence and the severe injuries inflicted preclude the grant of bail.
Summary
Anuj Yadav was charged under Sections 115(2) and 109 of the B.N.S. for allegedly pushing a train passenger, Mukesh Kumar, off a moving intercity train, causing the victim to fall under the wheels and lose both legs. The applicant pleaded innocence, claiming the incident was an accident and that he had no criminal antecedents. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the grievous nature of the injuries and labeling the act as heinous. The High Court, noting the severity of the injuries and the seriousness of the offence, refused to enlarge bail and dismissed the application. The court directed the trial court to conclude the trial expeditiously without unnecessary adjournments.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in a case involving grievous bodily injury (amputation of both legs) under Sections 115(2) and 109 of the B.N.S.
- Whether the gravity of the alleged offence precludes the grant of bail during trial
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109, 115(2)
Subjects
- bail
- grievous injury
- Sections 115(2) and 109
- heinous crime
- trial expeditious
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36176 of 2025
Anuj Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ankita Tiwari, Pramod Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State
and perused the material on record.
2. By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case
Crime No. 62 of 2025, under Sections 115(2) and 109 of B.N.S., P.S.
G.R.P., Etawah, District-Etawah, is seeking enlargement on bail during
the trial.
3. As per first information report the son of the informant was traveling
from Panki Dham to Kanchhosi Bazar on the Kanpur-Tundla Intercity
train on 28.7.2025 at about 4:40 PM. During the journey, an altercation
took placer between him and the applicant over some issue; in response,
the applicant physically assaulted the son of the informant namely,
Mukesh Kumar, aged bout 25, and pushed him out of the moving train, as
a result of which the son of the informant struck the platform and fell
beneath the train, resulting in the amputation of both his legs.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case
due to some ulterior motive. He next submitted that no such incident had,
in fact, occurred, and that the applicant had no involvement whatsoever
with the alleged incident. The reality is that the alleged victim fell from a
moving train as a result of an accident. He lastly submitted that the
applicant, who is in jail since 30.7.2025 and has no criminal antecedents
to his discredit is entitled to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the
BAIL No. 36176 of 2025
2
trial.
4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer
for bail and submitted that the applicant had pushed the victim off a
moving train, whereupon the victim came under the wheels of the train,
resulting in the amputation of both his legs. He further submitted that the
applicant has committed a heinous crime, hence he is not entitled to be
enlarged on bail.
5. In view of the nature of the injuries and the gravity of the offence,
wherein a young man has lost both his legs, this Court is not inclined to
enlarge the applicant on bail, accordingly, the bail petition is dismissed.
6. However considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case,
the trial court is directed the conclude the trial of the applicant as
expeditiously as possible without granting unnecessary adjournments to
either of the parties.
(Harvir Singh,J.)
April 2, 2026
Faridul
Digitally signed by :-
FAREEDUL HASAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…