Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10850 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8234 of 2024 Applicant :- Sanjay Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Verma,Pankaj Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ambrish Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant. 2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in F.I.R. No. 112 of 2024, under Sections 307, 120-B IPC and Section 4/25 Arms Act, Police Station Katra Bazar, District Gonda with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the F.I.R., however, after the investigation, on the basis of incorrect evidences, the Investigating Officer submitted the charge sheet against the applicant also. It is further submitted that during the course of trial, injured was examined as P.W. 1, who in his deposition, categorically stated that after the incident, he was brought to the police station and F.I.R. of the case in question was lodged. It is vehemently submitted that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. It is also submitted that 4 witnesses of fact have already been examined before the trial court and there is no possibility of tampering of any evidence. It is next submitted that the co-accused, Nirbhay Ram Upadhyay has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 18.06.2024 passed in Bail Application No. 6322 of 2024. Photocopy of the order dated 18.06.2024 is annexed as Annexure 7 to the bail application. It is lastly submitted that in near future, there is no possibility of conclusion of trial and the applicant, who has no criminal antecedent, is in jail since 24.04.2024. In such circumstances, applicant is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that the applicant will never misuse the liberty of bail and shall fully cooperate in the trial. 4. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant vehemently oppose the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submit that injured witness has categorically explained the role of the applicant in his deposition. However, they do not dispute the fact that in the F.I.R., the applicant was not named, though it is admitted by the injured in his deposition that immediately after the incident, he was brought to the police station. It is also very fairly conceded that co-accused, Nirbhay Ram Upadhyay has already been granted bail. 5. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A., learned counsel for the complainant and going through the contents of F.I.R., statements of the witnesses as well as other relevant documents, including the deposition of the injured (P.W. 1), it is evident that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. It is also evident that 4 witnesses of fact have already been examined and the applicant is in jail since 24.04.2024. In such circumstances, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 6. Application stands allowed. 7. Let applicant -Sanjay Pandey be released on bail in F.I.R. No. 112 of 2024, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (ii) 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 office or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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. (iv) 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 IPC. (v) 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. may be issued and if 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 IPC. (vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 19.2.2025 VKS Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench