Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:42312 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2213 of 2025 Applicant :- Lakhan Pandit @ Keshav Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abdul Ahad Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.299 of 2024, under Sections 109, 191(2), 191(3), 190, 61(2) BNS and Sections 3/5/25/27 Arms Act, P.S. Jagdishpur, District Amethi. In the prosecution case it is alleged that on 22.12.2024 at about 09:00 am while the son of the complainant Aneet Singh was standing outside the house, the named accused along with co- accused persons with an intent to kill came on black Scorpio vehicle and started indiscriminate firing on his son due to that his son became unconscious and fell down. Hearing the sound of firing, the complainant and others ran to rescue the injured thereafter, accused persons ran away. It is further alleged that earlier on 29.09.2024 in the birthday party of Yuvraj Singh some dispute took place between them however, no one complained. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that occurrence is of 22.12.2024. The first statement of the injured has been taken on 28.12.2024 in which he has assigned the role of firing to Yuvraj Singh. In order to save Yuvraj Singh, in the re-statement of injured, the role of firing has been assigned to the present applicant and Suraj Mishra. The re-statement was recorded on 20.01.2025. He submits that prosecution story is doubtful. In para 14 of the bail application specific pleading has been made that during investigation subsequent statement of the complainant and injured were recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 180 BNSS which are on record however, while giving reply to the bail application in paragraph 18 of the counter affidavit complainant has denied any such statement. It is submitted that applicant has no motive to commit such incident. He submits that all the three injuries are on non-vital part. Applicant has explained the criminal history of two cases in the bail application as well as in the rejoinder affidavit. He submits that immediately after the incident, the statement of injured Anit Pratap Singh was run by AGN News Express U.P., the pen drive is on record. In that statement the injured has not named the applicant. He also submits that alleged recovery of country made pistol from the applicant is false. There is no public witness. The applicant is in jail since 10.01.2025. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail prayer. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that applicant has fired on the victim. The injuries are grievous and victim remained admitted for seven days in Medanta Hospital. Perused the record. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that applicant is languishing in jail since 10.01.2025, applicant is not named in the F.I.R. neither in the statement of the complainant who is eye witness, prima facie in the first statement of the injured, the clear allegation of firing is on co-accused Yuvraj Singh although general allegation has been levelled on the applicant along with the co-accused in the re-statement, improvement has been made by the victim, the re-statement of the injured and complainant have been denied by the complainant in paragraph 18 of the counter affidavit so also considering the opinion of the doctor, the period of incarceration gone into by the applicant and the fact that the injuries are on non-vital part and without expressing any opinion on 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 - Lakhan Pandit @ Keshav Pandey be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions: (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 Panel Code (now Section 269 of BNS). (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. (now Section 84 BNSS) 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 Panel Code (now Section 209 BNS). Order Date :- 23.7.2025 Saurabh Yadav/- Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench