Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:20877 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2767 of 2025 Applicant :- Ramendra Yadav Alias Ravendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jay Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1 . Heard Sri Jay Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA, for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.242 of 2024, under Sections 105,115(2) and 352 BNS, Police Station Ughaiti, District Budaun during pendency of the trial. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 19.10.2024 against the applicant and according to the FIR, on 2.10.2024 applicant made assault upon the informant due to which he sustained injuries on his head. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that initially a NCR was lodged on 3.10.2024 with regard to incident dated 2.10.2024 but when informant died on 18.10.2024 then FIR of the present case was lodged on 19.10.2024 under Sections 105, 115(2) and 352 BNS. 5. He further submits that from the NCR, which is FIR of the present case, which was lodged by deceased it reflects that he did not assign any weapon to the applicant. He next submits, however, from the post mortem report it reflects that he sustained as many as eight injuries but it could not be said that injuries were sustained by him in the incident dated 2.10.2024 as he died on 18.10.2024. 6. He further submits that possibility cannot be ruled out that after alleged incident dated 2.10.2024 deceased would have sustained these injuries. 7. He further submits that in any case applicant cannot be held liable for the death of the deceased as post mortem report suggests that deceased died due to septicemia. 8. He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 24.12.2024. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. Considering the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that informant, i.e., deceased of the case, did not even assign any weapon to the applicant and he died after more than two weeks from the alleged incident of assault due to septicemia and applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 24.12.2024, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 12. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 13. Let the applicant-Ramendra Yadav @ Ravendra 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 his 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. 14. 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. 15. 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 :- 13.2.2025 SKM Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad