HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34239 of 2025 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State- respondents and perused the record. 2. This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant Panchu Alias Pancham seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.0326 of 2025, under Sections 333, 352, 109, 127(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Mahrauni, District- Lalitpur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused-applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and has been falsely implicated due to family dispute. Applicant is languishing in jail since 3.8.2025. It is submitted that in the FIR as well as in the statement of the injured, it has been stated that sharp weapon was used to cause injury but in the medical evidence/injury report sharp weapon injury has not been found. It is further submitted that only one injury i.e. lacerated injury has been mentioned in the injury report and in X-ray report no abnormality has been found and only soft tissue on neck has been mentioned. It is argued that the applicant has no criminal history except this case. It is further argued that the conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long and there is no likelihood of accused applicant fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for. 4. Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submits that applicant is named in the FIR and he caused sharp weapon injury to the injured. He admit that the statement of the doctor has not been recorded yet and the investigation is going on. He further submits that Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Nanhe Lal Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Shiv Kumar Singh Panchu Alias Pancham .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) charge-sheet has not been submitted yet. 5. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the paragraph no.53 of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2024, (SC) LawSuit 677 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that:- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC/269 BNS. (iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of BNSS is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC/209 of BNS. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 of B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. BAIL No. 34239 of 2025 2 6. BAIL No. 34239 of 2025 2 6. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 7. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. October 7, 2025 RA BAIL No. 34239 of 2025 3 (Santosh Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAZIQ ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad