Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:34912 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5102 of 2025 Applicant :- Dileep Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Verma,Akhilendra Pratap Singh,Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anuj Mishra,Avanish Kumar Azad,Mahesh Singh Yadav 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.33 of 2025, under Sections 190, 191(2), 115(2), 105, 351(3), 352 BNS, P.S. Sairpur, District Lucknow. According to prosecution case on 14.03.2025 at about 06:00 pm, five named accused persons along with unknown persons started beating by lathi and danda while hurling abuses. Hearing the alarm, when the complainant and others reached at the place of incident, they were also beaten by them in which Aman, Adarsh, Shivam, Pawan, Sachin have received injuries. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that two cross-F.I.R.s were lodged by both sides. From the applicant side F.I.R. No.32/2025 was registered and from the complainant side, F.I.R. No.33/2025 was registered. F.I.R. registered by the applicant's side was the first. It is submitted that deceased in the post mortem has been shown to have received four injuries however, injury Nos.1 and 2 is on account of surgical craniotomy which is a procedure for treating an injured. He submits that five named and two unnamed persons have been implicated and are alleged to have committed assault on Aniket. There are six injured from the side of the applicant. From the side of the complainant, apart from the deceased there are three more injured. He submits that from the applicant side Hemu has received fracture in the frontal bone which is a grievous injury. The injury sustained by the accused side has not been explained in the prosecution case. General allegations of causing injury has been levelled on all accused persons. It is not clear from the prosecution case that who is responsible for the injuries received by the deceased. Applicant has no criminal history. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 19.03.2025. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail prayer however, could not dispute that there are injured from both sides and could not dispute that the injury received by the accused side has not been explained in the prosecution case. Perused the record so also the post mortem report and the injury report of the injured. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 19.03.2025, according to the statement of the complainant, the incident occurred on a festive day of Holi, both sides were involved in the free fight, no specific role has been assigned to any of the accused for causing injury to the deceased coupled with the fact that applicant has no criminal history, charge-sheet has already been filed and injuries received on the accused side particularly by Hemu is grievous in nature which has not been explained by the prosecution 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. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Dileep Yadav 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 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 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 209 BNS. Order Date :- 6.6.2025 Saurabh Yadav/- Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench