Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86678 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39313 of 2024 Applicant :- Nanbaccha Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mool Chandra,Sanju Soni,Yash Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Mool Chandra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashutosh Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.144 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 105 B.N.S., Police Station Mahewaghat, District Kaushambi, during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is although named in the FIR alongwith his two other family members but as per allegation, made in the FIR, co-accused Bhaiyava Nishad was the principal accused. He next submits, however when the statements of eye-witnesses Priyanka Devi and Akhilesh were recorded then they stated that applicant and co- accused Bhaiyava Nishad and another accused made assault due to which deceased sustained injuries and died and therefore, during investigation, it reflects, prosecution developed a new story. 5. He further submits that even from the statements of eye- witnesses, it could not be reflected that applicant and others were having any intention to cause the death of the deceased. 6. He further submits that however, bail application of co-accused Bhaiyava Nishad has been dismissed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and his bail order has been annexed as Annexure S.A.-4 to the supplementary affidavit filed in support of the instant bail application but case of applicant is distinguishable from him as from the FIR, co-accused Bhaiyava Nishad appears to be principal accused. He further submits that even law is settled, there can be no parity with the bail rejection order. 7. He further submits that applicant is having no criminal history and applicant is in jail in the present matter since 23.07.2024 i.e. for last almost ten months. 8. Per contra, learned AGA however opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 9. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. However, from the statements of two eye-witnesses, it reflects, applicant and two others including co-accused Bhaiyava Nishad made assault upon the deceased due which he died and bail application of co-accused Bhaiyava Nishad has been dismissed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court but from the FIR, it reflects, co- accused Bhaiyava Nishad was the principal accused, who caused injury to the deceased and therefore, prima-facie, case of applicant appears to be distinguishable from the co-accused Bhaiyava Nishad. Further, this Court also finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that even there can be no parity from the bail rejection order. 11. Further, even from the statements of eye-witnesses, it reflects, they did not assign any specific weapon to any accused and according to them, applicant and others including co-accused Bhaiyava Nishad were making assault through wooden stick, kicks and fists but they further stated that co-accused Bhaiyava Nishad after the incident threw the wooden stick in the river, therefore, even from their statements, it reflects, co-accused Bhaiyava Nishad was the principal accused, who was having wooden stick. 12. Further, applicant is facing trial for offence under Section 105 B.N.S. and is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 23.07.2024 i.e. for last almost ten months. 13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 15. Let the applicant- Nanbaccha be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless her personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 16. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 17. 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 :- 21.5.2025 Zafar Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad