Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:28353 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3481 of 2025 Applicant :- Yashwant @ Jaswant Singh @ Babau And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar,Sudhir Kumar Agarwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Subhash Chandra Singh,Wilson Singh Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Sudhir Kumar Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Subhash Chandra Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicants on bail in Case Crime No. 406 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 115(2), 351(2), 352 B.N.S., Police Station Meja, District Prayagraj during pendency of the trial. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 17.07.2024 against applicants and according to the FIR on 17.07.2024 at about 6:00 AM in the morning due to the dispute of field applicants made assault upon the father of the informant through wooden stick and spade and due to the assault made by them, he sustained injuries. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits, initially FIR of the present case was lodged under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 352 B.N.S. but after the death of the injured case has been converted under Section 103(1) B.N.S. 5. He next submits, admittedly informant of the case was not an eye witness but in spite of that he disclosed the name of applicants in the FIR as accused and this fact clearly suggests that informant intended to falsely implicate the applicants. 6. He further submits, however, during investigation before the death of the deceased his statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 180 B.N.S.S. and he stated that applicants caused injury to him. 7. He next submits, from the statement of the deceased recorded during investigation it reflects, along with him, her grand daughter and her daughter-in-law were also present at spot and when their statements were recorded then they also repeated the version of the deceased but from the post mortem it reflects, deceased sustained four injuries including one lacerated wound and two injuries were multiple abraded contusions, therefore, it reflects applicants were not having any intention to cause death of the deceased and it appears, as deceased was about 85 years old and infirm person, therefore, he fell down and died due to Coma. 8. 8. He further submits, as autopsy report suggests that deceased died as a result of Coma due to ante mortem head injury, therefore, present case does not travel beyond Section 105(II) B.N.S. 9. He further submits, applicants are not having any criminal history and in the present matter they are in jail since 21.12.2024. 10. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted before his death deceased in his statement recorded during investigation specifically stated that applicants caused injury to him. They further submitted, even eye witnesses who were along with the deceased also repeated the version of the deceased, therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said that applicants are innocent and considering the nature of injuries sustained by the deceased and statements of the deceased and other eye witnesses recorded during investigation, applicants should not be released on bail. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. However, from the statements of the deceased and two eye witnesses who were along with him it reflect, applicants caused injuries to the deceased but from the post mortem it reflects, deceased died as a result of Coma due to head injury and from perusal of the post mortem it also reflects, deceased sustained four injuries including a lacerated wound and two injuries were multiple abraded contusions and considering the post mortem of the deceased, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicants that even if the allegations are accepted then also it could no be reflected that applicants were having intention to commit the murder of the deceased, cannot be ruled out at this stage specially considering the fact that deceased was 85 years old person. 13. Further, law is settled that unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and bail application should not be dismissed for punitive purpose. 14. Further, applicants are not having any criminal history and in the present matter they are in jail since 21.12.2024. 15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicants are entitled to be released on bail. 16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 17. Let the applicants - Yashwant @ Jaswant Singh @ Babau and Alok Singh 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 applicants shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless their personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicants 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 applicants shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 18. 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 applicants. 19. 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 :- 28.2.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad