HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8116 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. 2. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.102 of 2025 under Section 105 BNS, 2023, Police Station Itiyathok, District Gonda. 3. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 11.05.2025, the elder brother of the informant, Chandrashekhar Tiwari (deceased), who was mentally ill, went out of his house and entered into the house of Krishn Mohan Mishra. Annoyed by this, the named accused persons allegedly assaulted him with lathis and dandas at about 1:00 a.m., causing grievous injuries. During the course of treatment, he succumbed to the injuries. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 17.06.2025. The applicant is not named in the FIR. The complainant, in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., has not taken the name of the applicant. Similarly, the father of the deceased, Ram Prasad Tiwari, has also not named the applicant. Independent witnesses, namely Bhure, Rajesh Shukla, and Anil Kumar Mishra @ Gullu, have also not taken the name of the applicant. The statement of the independent witnesses were recorded on 12.05.2025, whereas the occurrence took place on 11.05.2025. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bal Keshwar Srivastava, Aniket Srivastav, Nishi Agarwal, Toshendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sachin @ Praveen Mishra .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) 5. It is further submitted that on the arrest of co-accused Shesh Narain Mishra, after 12 days, for the first time in his statement dated 22.05.2025, the name of the applicant was mentioned along with other co-accused persons. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer introduced certain independent/eye-witnesses namely Bhure, Harishchand Verma, Harishankar Yadav, and Shyam Narain Verma and their statements were recorded on 31.05.2025. It is submitted that this is a case of mistaken identity. 6. Learned counsel further submits that the complainant as well as the father of the deceased have filed Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 4507 of 2025 seeking fair investigation. The memo of the petition is on record as Annexure-11 to the writ petition. In the said writ petition, the alleged accused is mentioned as Sachin Kumar Mishra, son of Bala @ Vinod Kumar, whereas the present applicant is Sachin @ Praveen Mishra, son of Ghanshyam Mishra. Both are distinct persons and, therefore, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. 7. It is lastly submitted that as per the postmortem report, the cause of death is hemorrhage shock due to antemortem injuries. The deceased suffered five antemortem injuries. It is not clear as to who caused injury Nos. 1, 2, and 3, due to which he died. 8. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant. However, he does not dispute the fact that the name of the applicant was not initially taken by the prosecution witnesses, including the co-accused. For the first time, his name surfaced in the statement of the co-accused after a delay of 12 days from the date of the incident. It is also not disputed that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. 9. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. 10. On due consideration of the facts that general allegations have been levelled in the prosecution case; the applicant is neither named in the FIR nor in the statements of the complainant or any of the prosecution witnesses recorded within a week from the date of occurrence; his name has surfaced only on the basis of the confessional statement of a co-accused recorded by BAIL No. 8116 of 2025 2 the Investigating Officer after 12 days of the incident; the role of the applicant appears to be distinct from that of the co-accused persons named in the FIR; the charge-sheet in the matter has already been filed; and the applicant is in jail since 17.06.2025 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. 11. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant Sachin @ Praveen Mishra be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below 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 229-A of the IPC (now Section 269 BNS). (vi) 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. (now 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 174-A of the BAIL No. 8116 of 2025 3 IPC (now Section 209 BNS). August 28, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 8116 of 2025 4 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench