Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:46029 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7315 of 2025 Applicant :- Krishna Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- S.K. Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri S.K. Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Satyendra Srivastava, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.25 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 109(1), 110, 351(3) B.N.S., registered at Police Station Shiv Ratan Ganj, District Amethi. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 06.03.2025 against three persons, including the applicant, his father Rajaram and his nephew stating that the accused persons had forcibly taken possession of the informant's land. In this regard the informant has given letters to the Sub Divisional Magistrate and District Magistrate. On 05.03.2025 when the informant was getting his plot cleaned through the help of a JCB machine, the accused persons attacked the informant with iron rods, sticks and bricks. 4. The OPD slip dated 05.03.2025 of the informant mentions the chief complaint as history of assault and it mentions a lacerated wound in parietal lobe measuring approximately 15cm X 4mm. The supplementary medical report mentions healed wound in left parietal lobe with multiple healed wounds in both hands and lower limbs. 5. In the statement of the informant recorded by the Investigating Officer he reiterated the F.I.R. version. 6. In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. It has further been stated that a civil suit regarding the land in dispute is already pending between the parties and the informant had tried to forcibly dispossess the applicant's father during pendency of the suit. 7. The learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter. 8. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the informant himself has stated in the F.I.R. that the land is in possession of the accused persons regarding which he has given letters to the S.D.M. and D.M. and without intervention of the authorities he tried to interfere in the possession of the land and the incident took place; that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 18.04.2025 and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, 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 crime. 9. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 10. Let the applicant-Krishna Kumar Yadav 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 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, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 7.8.2025 Ram. Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench