Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:34223 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 334 of 2025 Applicant :- Ranu Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Deepti Gupta,Upendra Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. This is the second bail application, while the first bail application was rejected by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 13155 of 2024 vide order dated 20.12.2024. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. As per the prosecution case, on 26.9.2024, the complainant's husband namely, Gyanendra Shukla while reversing his car accidentally hit the wall of the house of the accused which caused the wall to collapse. On 27.9.2024, the applicant along with co-accused Arun Pandey (son of the applicant) came in front of the house of the complainant in an inebriated state and started abusing and suddenly fired upon Gyanendra Shukla, but the gunshot passed across his right chest. On hearing noise of fire, people surrounded and then the accused persons ran away while throwing country made pistol and extending threat to life. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although the alleged incident took place in front of the eyewitnesses and as per the prosecution version, the accused persons ran away after throwing away the country made pistol, but the police has shown false recovery of country made pistol from the possession of the applicant. He further submits that the injury received is simple in nature. A perusal of the bed ticket also shows about the nature of injuries and depicts that the injury may be accidental also. He also submits that there are three prosecution versions of the same incident viz., the wife, the injured and one witness namely, Shivam @ Bhelu Kushwaha. All these three witnesses have given the contradictory versions. The applicant has explained the criminal history in para no. 20 of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 27.9.2024. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record so also the status report of the learned trial court dated 30.4.2025 which shows that although the charges have been framed, but not even a single prosecution witness has been examined till date. Thus, considering the statement of the prosecution witnesses, the nature of injuries as well as the status report of the learned trial court as well as the judgement of the Apex Court in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1693 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Ranu Pandey involved in Case Crime No. 278/2024, under Sections 109,352,351(3) B.N.S. & Section 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station- Fatehpur-84, District- Unnao, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) 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. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (vi) 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. 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 of the Indian Penal Code. Order Date :- 2.6.2025 Shravan Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench