Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:26587 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3924 of 2025 Applicant :- Anshu Yadav @ Kali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. (Home) Govt. Of U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Satya Prakash Mishra,Satya Prakash Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Shri Satya Prakash Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Ambrish Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Roshan Babu Gupta, learned counsel for the informant and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.53 of 2025 under Sections 103(1), 115(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190 of B.N.S. registered at Police Station- Kakori, District- Lucknow (West). 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 20.02.2025 against- (i) Sumit Kanaujia, (ii) Golu Yadav, (iii) Tauwa Yadav and (iv) Akhilesh Yadav, stating that the informant and his companion Kunal had stopped at a cigarette shop. When the shopkeeper stated about unavailability of cigarette, the informant's companion Kunal suggested that they should take some other cigarette. Upon this, Akhilesh Yadav slapped him. When the dispute escalated, the informant told his brother-in-law Ankit Rajput about the incident. Ankit came on the spot alongwith his companion Suraj Rawat and Karan. By that time, the miscreants had already gone away. Ankit made a phone call to Sumit Kanaujia and enquired about the incident. Thereafter, Sumit Kanaujia came back with Golu Yadav, Tauwa Yadav and Akhilesh Yadav and any one of the aforesaid four persons shot at the informant's brother-in-law Ankit. He was taken to the Hospital where he was declared dead. 4. The police arrested four persons- (i) Sumit Kanaujia, (ii) Sarvan, (iii) Anshu Yadav (the applicant) and (iv) Ranjeet Kumar on the basis of information received from a Mukhbir. Different amount of money and two motorcycles were recovered from their possession. Rs.250 and a motorcycle were recovered from the applicant. In the custodial statement, the accused persons confessed about their involvement in commission of the offence and they stated that Himanshu @ Golu had shot at the deceased. 5. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is a young man aged 19 years having no criminal history and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. 6. Learned A.G.A. as well as the learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail application. Learned A.G.A. has produced relevant extract of case diary for perusal of the Court. The cigarette shop owner Abrar has stated that Sumit Kanaujia and Akhilesh Yadav had come there alongwith Himanshu @ Golu Yadav, Sarvan @ Tauwa Yadav, Ranjeet and Anshu Yadav, all of them surrounded Ankit Lodhi and someone of them had shot at him. Learned A.G.A. has further submitted that the investigation of the case is still pending. 7. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the informant was present on the spot of the incident and in the FIR lodged about six hours of the incident, he has subsequently named four persons and he has not named the applicant therein; the applicant has been arrested by the police when he is said to be present at that place alognwith two accused persons Sumit Kanaujia and Golu Yadav; no incriminating material has been recovered from the applicant; although the informant has stated about involvement of four named persons in commission of the offence, subsequently the shopkeeper stated that six persons were involved in commission of the offence, including the applicant; even in that statement, the only allegation is that the applicant was standing there surrounding the deceased person and no other allegation has been levelled against the applicant and that the applicant is a young man aged 19 years having no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 24.02.2025, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid case. 8. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 9. Let the applicant-Anshu Yadav @ Kali be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court. . [Subhash Vidyarthi, J.] Order Date :- 7.5.2025 -Amit K- Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench