BEFORE THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE COURT AT LUCKNOW

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. ___/2021

IN THE MATTER OF

STATE … PROSECUTION

VERSUS

RAJIV KHANNA … DEFENCE

FIR NUMBER: 456/2021

UNDER SECTIONS: 34, 120B AND 320 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860

POLICE STATION: KIDWAI NAGAR POLICE STATION

SYNOPSIS
DATE EVENT
A scuffle between the accused and the deceased broke out and the
23.12.2021
deceased died due to a bat blow to his head.
Registration of the FIR against the accused as per the statements of the
24.12.2021
Watchman and the Dean.

1|Page
 BEFORE THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE COURT AT LUCKNOW

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. _____/2021

IN THE MATTER OF

STATE
VS
RAJIV KHANNA

APPLICATION U/S 438 CRPC FOR GRANT OF ANTICIPATORY BAIL ON

APPLICANT: 1. RAJIV KHANNA s/o Mr. Gurpeet Khanna Residing

2. ANURAG VYAS s/o Kashyap Vyas, r/o Kidwai

NON-APPLICANT: State of Uttar Pradesh through police station officer

MOST RESPECTFULLY AND HUMBLY SUBMITTED AS UNDER:

1. The application stands necessitated because of the registration of first information

report at the behest of the Watchmen and the Dean of the College with police station

Kidwai Nagar vide crime no 456/2021 dated 24.12.2021 for offence punishable under

sections 302, 34 and 120B of Indian penal code. The applicants apprehending their

arrest in the same matter, further make this anticipatory bail application.

2|Page
 2. That the applicants are respectable, peace-loving citizens of India and have no record

of criminal antecedents.

3. That the present FIR has been registered on false and bogus facts. The facts stated in

the FIR are twisted, concocted and are without any basis. The correct facts are as under:

3.1 Mr. Pritam Sikka, the deceased, hereinafter, was a vice captain of his college

cricket team. He was also the student of the college he represented in Cricket.

3.2 The deceased was a good sportsman but lapsed into drugs and alcohol addiction.

Addiction and the whiff of illicit substances made him lose his interest in the

game. The diminishing interest was accompanied by irregularity in practices

and that led to huge losses to the cricket team.

3.3 The team captain, Mr. Rajiv Khanna, the main accused hereinafter, after finding

out about this ordeal, advised the deceased to take some time off to focus on

getting rid of the addiction. To save the deceased’s face, the main accused

suggested that he fake an illness.

3.4 Thereafter, the news of fake illness spread like a wildfire and hence the main

accused went to confront the deceased. The main accused confronted the

deceased and it is alleged that he belittled him by saying that he is a good for

nothing and is the reason behind the teams fall.

3.5 A scuffle broke out between the two resulting into the death of the deceased due

to a cricket bat’s blow to his head. The cleaner Mr. Anurag, co-accused

hereinafter, was merely standing in the door and was scared and shocked. The

watchman and the other members of the cricket team had noticed this incident,

who then informed the Dean.

3|Page
 3.6 Consequently, the first information report (FIR) was recorded on 24.12.2021

based on the statement given by the Watchmen and the Dean of the College

against Rajiv Khanna and Anurag under sections 34 ,120B, 302 of IPC 1860.

4. Grounds under which the accused are not liable to be arrested should the necessity

arises:

4.1 That the co-accused is not directly or indirectly linked to the event of the

deceased’s death. He was merely standing at the door and was beyond his moral

and physical senses; in a state of shock. It is most humbly submitted that not

being able to take any action because of shock does not attract the severe penile

provisions of Sections 34 and 120B as it is eminent that there was no criminal

conspiracy or pre-meditation between both the accused. Only by standing

beside the door, he cannot have inflicted any physical harm to the deceased and

hence, the co-accused is not liable for the punishment prescribed under Section

302 of the Indian Penal Code and hence, should not be arrested.

4.2 That a scuffle broke out between the deceased and the accused. A scuffle is not

an incident where only one party is guilty of inflicting the harm. The deceased,

in this particular case, is as much responsible as the accused in instigating the

fight. Since the deceased has a precedent of addiction of liquor and other illicit

substances, it can be very clearly presumed that the deceased was not in his right

mind when the scuffle broke out and as a result has provoked the accused in

making a stern retort.

4.3 The accused had no pre planning or premeditation of the incident and hence, the

mental element required to attract the provisions of Sections 34 and 120B do

not come into play. Hence, the accused is not liable to be arrested and thrown

into jail for the same. The element of knowingly causing any harm to a person

4|Page
 does not come into play as the accused’s actions were purely based as a retort

to the actions, poking and provocation on behalf of the deceased. Therefore, the

punishment prescribed under section 302 is not applicable to the person and

hence, his arrest, should it be made, shall be invalid in law.

5. That the above stated arguments make it clear that the applicant accused are not

required in any kind of custodial interrogation.

6. That the applicant has very good antecedents, he belongs to good family and there is

no criminal case pending against them.

7. That the applicant is a permanent resident and there are no chances of his absconding

from the course of justice.

8. That the applicant undertakes to present himself before the police/court as and when

directed.

9. That the applicant undertakes that he will 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.

10. That the applicant further undertakes not to tamper with the evidence.

11. That the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

12. That the applicant is ready and willing to accept any other conditions as may be imposed

by the Court or the police in connection with the case.

13. The applicant has not moved any applicant for grant of bail before the Hon’ble High

Court or the Hon’ble Apex court with respect to the present matter.

Hence this application.

5|Page
 PRAYER

It is therefore humbly and respectfully prayed that the court may be pleased to:

1. Direct the release the applicant in the event of his arrest by the police.

2. Allow the application.

3. Pass any other order which the court may deem fit and proper in the facts and

circumstances of the case may be also passed in favor of the applicant.

PLACE: LUCKNOW

DATE: 25.12.2021 COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT

6|Page
 SOLEMN AFFIRMATION

I, Rajiv Khanna, aged about 21 years, Occu: student, R/o. Kidwai Nagar H-Block, Lucknow,
Uttar Pradesh 208016, do hereby take oath and state on solemn Affirmation that the contents
of above Application from paras 1 to 13 are correctly drafted by my counsel as per information
and document supplied by me. The same are explained to me in vernacular and found to be
drafted correctly as per my instructions. The contents of above application from paras 1 to 13
are true to the best of my personal knowledge and belief.

I, Anurag Vyas, aged about 26 years, Occu: cleaner, R/o. Kidwai Nagar U-Block, Lucknow,
Uttar Pradesh 208016, do hereby take oath and state on solemn Affirmation that the contents
of above Application from paras 1 to 13 are correctly drafted by my counsel as per information
and document supplied by me. The same are explained to me in vernacular and found to be
drafted correctly as per my instructions. The contents of above application from paras 1 to 13
are true to the best of my personal knowledge and belief.

Hence verified and signed on this 25th day of December, 2021 at Lucknow.

I KNOW & IDENTIFY THE DEPONENTS. DEPONENT 1.

DEPONENT 2.

(ADVOCATE)

7|Page