Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:70490 Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45802 of 2024 Applicant :- Rajendra Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajneesh Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Dhirendra Kumar Verma,G.A.,Srawan Kumar Swarnkar Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. List revised. None appears for the informant. 2. Heard Sri Pranvansh, learned counsel holding brief of Sri J.NYadav, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a first information report was lodged against 29 named and 20 unknown persons alleging therein that when the first informant went to caste the Parliamentary election, the booth agent of Dimple Yadav, tried to resist him from casting the vote. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the informant alleged to have sustained injuries on his eye by Butt of fire arm whereas, in the opinion of doctor, injuries are sustained to have been caused by bricks. Learned counsel further argued that the informant went to a private hospital for his treatment on 07.05.2025 thereafter he was discharged on 09.05.2024. He furthr submits that the injured was also medically examined at C.H.C. Bewar, District Mainpuri in which it was found that the injured sustained as many as eight injuries except injuries nos.2, 7 and 8 all injuries were simple in nature caused by hard and blunt object. It is further submitted that the supplementary injury report shows that the injury nos. 7 and 8 were found simple in nature. It is further contended that the applicant is member of party sitting in opposition and has been falsely implicated due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel next argued that in mob of more than 49 persons, it is very strange that the informant would recognise 29 accused persons by their parentage and address, which itself shows that the application was targeted by the ruling party to implicate him on the day of voting. It is thus contended that that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely roped due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel next argued that the applicant has no criminal history. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 21.11.2025. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. 5. After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view, that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 6. Let applicant Rajendra Singh involved in Case Crime No. 167 of 2024 under Sections 147, 149, 341, 188, 323, 504, 506, 326, 307, 427 I.P.C., Police Station Bewar, District Mainpuri, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:- i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission. v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 7. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law. 8. The bail application is allowed. Order Date :- 2.5.2025 S.Ali Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad