Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:78410 Court No. - 88 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43633 of 2024 Applicant :- Hariom Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J. 1. Instant application has been filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 seeking regular bail in Case Crime No.188 of 2024, for the offence punishable under sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 333, 109(1) of B.N.S. and section 3/25/27 of Arms Act, Police Station Jansath, District Muzaffarnagar, during pendency of the trial. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has not committed offence as alleged in the FIR. It is further submitted applicant was not named in the FIR and his name has come in the statement of co-accused Golu son of Leele. He further submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 30.08.2024. It is also submitted that as per the allegations made in the FIR, six named and one unknown persons are alleged to have caused firearm injury to the husband of the informant and one Pintu. He next submitted that in FIR no specific role of firing has been attributed to named accused persons. It is alleged that husband of informant Rishipal and neighbour Pintu have received firearm injury on thigh and hip and the injured were taken to the hospital. As per the medical reports, both injured received single shot injury, which is not on the vital part of the body. There is matrimonial dispute between the parties. In statement of two injured persons, this fact has developed that on exhortation of co-accused, accused Aryan fired a shot on Rishipal and Hariom fired a shot on injured Pintu. Co- accused Golu @ Yaman, Bablu, Ashish, Akash, Prince, Vikrant, Bala except Aryan, have already been released on bail and the bail orders passed on respective bail applications are produced before the Court. The applicant has explained criminal history of 10 cases through supplementary affidavit dated 20.3.2025. 3. It is also submitted that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is prayed on behalf of the applicant that the applicant may be released on bail in the aforesaid crime. It is further undertaken that applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions as imposed by the Court. 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the instant bail application and submitted that applicant was present at the time of incident, as mentioned in the FIR, with six named accused and one unknown person including present applicant. However, he has not disputed the facts that no specific role has been assigned to the present applicant in the FIR but in the statement of injured witnesses, specific role of causing firearm injuries have been assigned to the applicant and co-accused Aryan. 5. Heard Sri Hemendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 6. I have gone through the contents made in the application as well as the documents appended with the application and perused the record. 7. I have perused FIR version in the light of the statements of two injured persons and the fact that all the accused persons except Aryan are already released on bail. Taking into consideration entirety of the matter as discussed above, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. The bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Hariom, who is involved in the aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- 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 applicant shall not tamper with the evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 BNSS. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate of 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. 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 13.5.2025 Dhirendra/ Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad