HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33368 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Mahesh Prasad Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicants seek bail in Case Crime No.431 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 110, 118(1), 352, 351(2) B.N.S., Police Station Sarai Lakhansi, District Mau, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicants alongwith co-accused persons Vishal and Shanti Devi is stated to have assaulted and caused injuries to three persons in all on 22.10.2024 at about 10:00 a.m. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants has argued that the applicants are absolutely innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by more than four hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. It is true that three persons had sustained injuries in the said case which was found to be grievous in nature, but two persons from the side of the applicants had also sustained injuries including applicant no.1 and his wife Shanti Devi. The cross FIR No.447 of 2024 was instituted at the police station on 29.10.2024, although the injuries of the two injured persons were of the date of occurrence only. 6. Learned counsel for the applicants has further argued that at this point of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Harendra Yadav, Mahesh Prasad Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Kalika Yadav And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) time, it cannot be ascertained as to which party was the aggressor one. There is no criminal history of the applicants. The applicants are languishing in jail since 11.09.2025 and they are ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that there is cross version to the instant case, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie, the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicants- Kalika Yadav and Vikas Yadav, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on 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 applicants shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicants shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicants shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicants 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 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 33368 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad